Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
Today at 09:22 AM

Jamal Khashoggi ...........
Yesterday at 04:55 PM

Freely down loadable Boo...
Yesterday at 10:25 AM

ما هي الحكمة من الماشية ا...
October 13, 2018, 10:15 AM

Save Asia Bibi. The Rampa...
October 13, 2018, 09:06 AM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
October 13, 2018, 08:38 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
October 11, 2018, 11:11 PM

Here is the News for FAIT...
October 11, 2018, 07:53 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim

 (Read 90715 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 15 16 17« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #480 - March 28, 2016, 02:36 AM

    For now I'd just like to focus on questions that puzzle me regarding Islam, Muslims, Quranic Teachings, the Hadith Collections and Mohammed..
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #481 - March 28, 2016, 06:24 AM

    The Bible makes use of figurative language which are often misinterpreted.. In the Original languages, the Bible used the Hebrew word "SHE'OHL" and the Greek word "HAI'DES" to represent the common grave of mankind but Bible translators by allowing their personal understanding of the words mixed with their own beliefs have rendered these words as "hell" and "grave" which does not convey the actual sense of these words resulting in this misconception.


    They changed the basis of Sheol in Judaism to match their Greeco-Roman influence mixed with Zoroastrian punishment/saved dynamics during the exile and post exile periods
    Prior to the exile Sheol never had any reference to the changes found in the NT and later OT texts. In the NT this became a place of the wicked only with the "saved" being sent to Heaven. Yet in Judaism no one could avoid it as it was part of the purification process of the soul. So no there was not a misconception as these were ideas already present prior to Jesus' birth. The religion changed, assimilated and evolved. All you are doing is arguing your idea of doctrine, dogma and theology but ignoring the actual dogma, theology and doctrine of the time these texts were created.

    The reason for your confusion is that you are using two translations which make the mistake of mixing all these concepts together and are unreliable compared to modern translations. Both your sources do this which shows you have only read one bible no one outside the JW accepts or an archaic Protestant biased translation made centuries ago based on "Relieved Texts" ie the texts they think are accurate are by the Will of God. When one attempts to make a translations going in with dogma and doctrine already in mind will end is problems.

    Quote
    The Bible also use the Greek word GEHENNA, symbolic of eternal destruction, not eternal torment.. Gehenna is associated with fire and got its name from a garbage dump located outside of ancient Jerusalem.. Garbage and dead bodies of convicted criminals considered to be unworthy of a burial were burned there. Agreed most Churches in Christendom understand this as a literal place where God will punish disobedient mankind. But is that so? Consider what is mentioned at:


    Which just shows the mixing and matching of text such as the KJV you cite below. All 4 were one in the same in the KJV and the JW version

    Quote
    Psalm 146:4: "His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth and in that very day his thoughts perish." KJV.


    Which only shows that have expectation in the Prince, the subject of the chapter, and mentioned directly prior, can not save people. His goals, aspirations are like dust at death. You are reading what you want into the text with ignoring the point is that faith in God is the only path not faith in mortals. Read the whole chapter next time. Read all the sources I mention. Again the KJV treats all as synonymous. You are reading something into the translation your own translation contradict in it's theology.

    Quote
    When Adam was told that he would return to the dust, it meant to a state of unconsciousness (a state of nonexistence as he was before he was created).


    No it doesn't. You are projection your flawed theology above on to earlier scripture and calling it true.

    Quote
    The Bible does not teach that a person experiences anguish after death as punishment for his sins. It does not teach that a person possesses an immortal soul which survives the death of our body. It does not teach that we can think, hate and feel anger or pain at death.. The whole concept of Hell may have been rooted in the religion of ancient Egypt..


    The book of Daniel does which shows the assimilation of Persian, not Egyptian, ideas. The post-exile period repeats the idea of an immortal soul and resurrection so your absolute claim is false. Read the book of Daniel, 2 Maccabees. Read about Samuel rising and Enoch.


    Quote
    There is so much more to it. However we'd have to continue this in a new Thread.. People differ greatly in their interpretations. And no Bogart. I may have said things that I did not quite understand at first when I joined this forum, things I wanted to withdraw but I'm not of any religion and I'm not a Christian.. Maybe I might be.. I try to be unbiased in my approach and open-minded to learn religious teachings. I was sooo close to converting to Islam but have so many unanswered questions and discovered a lot of absurdities.. You can say I'm on a search so I'll accept my mistakes as I go along. For now I'm reading and gathering information... I value other's views and reasoning and if something sounds logical I go for that.. It's my humble request in this forum to not be associated with any religion..


    First off do not read The New World Translation, its not credible. It is edited to include doctrine and dogma of a cult like sect of Christianity. It denies the divinity of Christ which no other version of the Bible even thinks about let alone writes about. You are reading their theology as if it was really the Bible. It isn't. The KJV version also has doctrine and dogma issues especially with divine right of Kings and the very man behind the project was a King with his own agenda as Head of the Church of England. It has over 30,000 errors, interpolations, horrible understanding of Hebrew, mistranslated both Greek and Hebrew. It is based not on early manuscripts but those passed down by the Church, and accepted as authentic by said Church. Modern translations are far more reliable as Biblical Hebrew is considered which was not present during the KJV creation. These also include clear parameters identifying later additions to the Bible. If you need to use one version use NIV or at least something modern based on Greek (NT) and Hebrew Texts (OT), KJV is based not based on Biblical Hebrew but Mishnaic Hebrew (OT) and translation of it into Greek (OT along with NT references to OT).

    If you want have a discussion about the Bible fine by me. However I am going to ask you to consider that your theology does not equate scholarship. If you wish to express Jehovah Witness theology I have no interest. Their view is based on doctrine not scholarship, scholarship is misused to reinforce doctrine. It's translations and view have no merit outside of their group. More so the group has discredited themselves for over a century. I am sure many are good people but their views on the Bible are nonsense.

    If a mod wants to move this and relevant posts feel free to.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #482 - March 28, 2016, 01:40 PM

    Thanks Bogart. I hear all what you're saying. I'll have a look at the NIV translation and work on this unscholarly approach of mine. In time, research will help me to draw conclusions as to whether my claims can be hammered home. Not to worry. It's a learning process after all and I'll go for logics not blind faith. I think those who preside over this forum should have these posts and other related ones to this subject removed from this thread keeping it clear for questions to ask Muslims of which I have countless..
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #483 - May 16, 2016, 01:50 AM

    Below are the questions I have pertaining to Islam. If there is a God then I'm sure he must be aware of the existing religious confusion, yet in his infinite wisdom he sees it fit to stay hidden. It's just confusing. Every religion claims to be the only right way to Him and pretty much every one else is viewed as a disbeliever condemned to the hell-fire (considering the entire concept of hell fire is not fictional). I'm not blind to the beautiful aspects of Islam as a religion but at the same time I cannot reconcile a lot of its teachings with my conscience. Okay let me get on with the questions before someone here decides to drown me in a tank of water.

    1] Why does all-knowing Allah need to test us if he can discern the thoughts and intentions of our hearts?

    2] I'm sure God can understand all the languages spoken in the world today. Why then do we have to recite our prayers in Arabic for them to be accepted?

    3] What was the divine purpose behind using up Qur'an space in the last and final revelation to mankind to tell us not to linger too long in the prophet's house because it annoys him? What purpose does this verse have in God's last message to mankind for all times to come? Sounds divine if you ask me..

    4] Why did Mohammad limit his followers to 4 wives at a time yet Allah allowed him to have unlimited sexual partners and we're told that in him, a man with exemplary morals, we have a perfect example to follow?

    5] Why did Mohammad not allow his son-in-law to take another wife?

    6] If we have free will then how does that not go in direct contradiction to the teaching of predestination?

    7] What can be the logic behind Allah choosing to deliberately seal the hearing and sight of so many people so that they cannot accept Islam? If my heart has been veiled, how is it my fault if I cannot see the truth of Islam?

    8] What makes you so sure that you are following the right religion?

    9] Would you attribute the qualities of love, justice and mercy to a father who tortures his son for an act of disobedience by throwing him alive in fire and then keeping him alive for all eternity so he can be tortured again and again? Does that not sound crazy to you?

    10] What is the woman's place in Allah's arrangement?

    11] What does the Islamic paradise have in store for women?

    12] Why does a wife have to provide her body for her husband's satisfaction whenever he so desires it even if she is occupied by the oven? What about her feelings? And why is this such a big deal that Allah has to step in and assign the holy angels to curse the wife if her husband goes to bed angry? What if the wife feels like it but he doesn't? What if she goes to bed angry? Would the angels curse him for denying his wife?
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #484 - May 16, 2016, 02:21 AM

    13] Does Islam condone the act of raping female captives? Does a female slave have the right to refusal of her master's sexual advances?
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #485 - May 16, 2016, 03:48 PM

    14) Can mohd. claim any of our allotted hoors for himself in jannat like he claimed his sons wife?
    15) Are we allowed to hide our allotted hoors in jannat from mohd.?
    16) Can we beat hoors in jannat for non compliance or if they have mood swings and /or deny sex. ? or the hoor will be ever ready by default?
    17)Will our new bodies in jannat come  pre -circumcised or the process needs to be repeated ?
    18) Will the male organ size differ based on skin color in jannat or is it custom order?

    19) Did allah know that torat and bible will be corrupted when he sent jesus and moses ? he already knew it would get misunderstood?
    20) Did mohd. succeed in doing job correctly as last messenger by leaving perfect clear message ?
    21) did allah know that mohd. was last messenger and after he is dead there will be 10+ sects of islam ? and all sects would convert more people in wrong sects other than the one correct one?
    22) if quran is gods word why is it less entertaining than man created tv shows ? will we get to watch any tv shows in jannat?

    All i know is what was told,
    All i think is what i know,
    All i am is what i think,
    All i know NOT is who i am.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #486 - May 16, 2016, 04:03 PM

    14) Can mohd. claim any of our allotted hoors for himself in jannat like he claimed his sons wife?
    15) Are we allowed to hide our allotted hoors in jannat from mohd.?
    16) Can we beat hoors in jannat for non compliance or if they have mood swings and /or deny sex. ? or the hoor will be ever ready by default?
    17)Will our new bodies in jannat come  pre -circumcised or the process needs to be repeated ?
    18) Will the male organ size differ based on skin color in jannat or is it custom order?

    19) Did allah know that torat and bible will be corrupted when he sent jesus and moses ? he already knew it would get misunderstood?
    20) Did mohd. succeed in doing job correctly as last messenger by leaving perfect clear message ?
    21) did allah know that mohd. was last messenger and after he is dead there will be 10+ sects of islam ? and all sects would convert more people in wrong sects other than the one correct one?
    22) if quran is gods word why is it less entertaining than man created tv shows ? will we get to watch any tv shows in jannat?



    JUNK......  and      Junky Junk


    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #487 - May 16, 2016, 04:12 PM

    so based on our points we get hoors and such? if mohd got a donkey for travel to heaven for his efforts and special status , can we earn a donkey each for our inter jannat travels ?

    All i know is what was told,
    All i think is what i know,
    All i am is what i think,
    All i know NOT is who i am.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #488 - May 16, 2016, 06:21 PM

    so based on   biased are our points we get hoors and such? if mohd got a donkey for travel to heaven for his efforts and special status , can we earn a donkey each for our inter jannat travels ?


    well unless you get all that what you write from Quran.,  I am not going to beleive what you roaring about silentroar.,  If you can not get all that stuff from Quran then you are only making  noise with nose...

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #489 - May 17, 2016, 12:28 AM

    In the 21st Century, why is it acceptable for religious beliefs that debase women like polygamy to be practised? Shouldn't such practises be excised from Islam, and whatever sources they gain their legitimacy from, be disowned?



    There are no women rights in islam.
    Forget about rights in islam.

    I think you have some problem.
    Every thing I post, looks weird to you.


  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #490 - May 17, 2016, 05:16 AM

    Cont'd
    14] How do you explain away Mohammad referring to women as being deficient in intelligence? Was he actually saying women are intellectually inferior to men?

    15] As an individual, how would you like to be owned, enslaved, purchased/sold?

    16] According to Islam, what is the meaning/significance of the word Messiah?
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #491 - May 17, 2016, 05:53 AM

    17] If Allah of the Qur'an is the same God of the Bible, then why did He not protect His earlier messages from this corruption? Why claim to do so only now? Does it make sense now for those who are genuinely confused? Were those messages not as good or important enough to preserve? Is God limited in his power to preserve all of His revelations? Why would an all-powerful, omniscient and all-wise God have to resort to this kind of thing - invalidating His own messages, claiming that these little despicable creatures that call themselves humans were able to corrupt His divine revelations and seeing it fit to just send another book (causing more confusion) instead of clearing up the existing mess or avoiding such a mess in the first place? After all, the Jews and Christians are misled because they follow the previous scriptures sent by this same God and to have these punished for following his previous scriptures just does not sound right. None of this sound like the acts or thinking of a wise God.. Surely God in his all-knowing wisdom foresaw this confusion from the inception.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #492 - September 07, 2016, 01:48 AM

    Do you know Islam allow a father to marry his illegitimate daughter?

    - Imam Shafi'i said so.
    - Shafi'i is one of the 4 Sunni Madhabs.
    - Any Muslim may follow any of the 4 Madhabs he likes on any issue.

    Quran 4:23 "forbidden to you are your mothers and your daughters [banatukum]"

    This text is definitive on the basic prohibition of marriage with one's mother and daughter and there is no disagreement on this point. However, the word banatukum (your daughters) could include one's real daugther, step-daughter and illegitimate daughter. A subsequent portion of the text eliminates the doubt with regard to step-daughter, as these are declared forbidden. But the jurists have differed as to whether the prohibition should be extended to illegitimate daugthers. The Hanafis have upheld that both real (ie. daughters through marriage) and illegitimate daugthers are included in the meaining of this text, but the Shafi'is maintain that only the daugther through marriage is forbidden. Similar differences of interpretation could ahve arisen regarding the exact meaning of 'mothers' had the Qur'an itself and also the Sunnah not clarified the precise import of the text. Consequently, there remains no dought taht besides the real mother, step-motehr and foster mother are all included in the meaning of this text" page 23, Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Shari'ah Law: An Introduction, ISBN 978-1-85168-565-3
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #493 - July 25, 2018, 11:06 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    Why did Allah send so many prophets to the Jews?


    The descendants of Isaac, during the time they were tasked under oath to be the bearers of the truth to the nations, having been sent many prophets -some of them distanced by 400 years such as Malachi and Jesus, and now no prophet is sent to them- contrary to the Ishmaelites, is actually a stain against them because the majority of these prophets were sent to bring them back to the right path, as stated in the HB, to remind them of the terms of the divine covenant. Jesus alludes to this multiple times, especially in his parable of the King, who sends his servants, and finally his son and after they murder the son, Jesus tells them that as a consequence their nation will be destroyed and a new nation will come forth which will establish the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. What the Israelites failed to do with multiple Prophets by falling away from the path and repeatedly breaking their covenant, the Ishmaelites did with one.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #494 - July 25, 2018, 11:08 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    What is so special about Isa that he is born of a virgin,


    The particularities of Yahya/John and Jesus' births, do not make any of them different or special than other human beings in terms of their physical nature, neither were these miraculous circumstances necessary to accomodate the births of some individuals with special physical characteristics. In fact Jesus' very first word was to declare his servitude to God, besides declaring other lofty aspects of his identity, as well as empasizing the tenets of monotheism 19:30. They both were mortals, made from exactly the same elements as other humans, through God's creative word 2:117"Be" which symbolizes an unhindered process (not the absence of a process) fully in His grasp 3:59"Surely the likeness of Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be", and he was". They are both the manifestation of the creative word.

    This miraculous conception is a sign not only Jesus would be known by, but also his mother and the name "son of Mary" implies exactly that; she would jointly share this sign with him forever as both of their names will be mentionned together 23:50,21:91"and made her and her son a sign for the worlds". Jesus as well as his mother were chosen to be made jointly, "A" single sign of the power of the Maker and Creator over all things. So from a Quranic perspective, that miracle equally sets Mary and Jesus appart from humanity. Before discussing the implications of this sign, it is worthwile noting that by honoring Mary in such a way and joining her name to that of one of the most illustrous individuals to have walked the earth, God has defeated in His final revelation and until the resurrection, the slanderous talk of some among her contemporaries and those that followed, who wanted to put a stain on her and abase her.
    As regards the sign, it consists in demonstrating how the resurrection of bodies isnt a difficult task to God. We deem it impossible for a female to give life without the necessary biological process yet God did it, so just as He easily creates life in conditions we think are impossible then similarily He is able to bring the dead back to life even if the conditions make it unfeasable from our perspective. The rejection of the concept of resurrection by many Jews of the time adds to the relevancy of that miracle. One can even argue that Jesus was given the greatest evidence for resurrection among God's prophets who all equally stressed the importance of that tenet to their people. This is because Jesus is the only explicit case in the prophetic history where a human's birth did not result from mating. The Quran doesnt even state that Adam was born in such a way, ie that he was not the result of sexual reproduction, and although other miraculous births are recorded in the Quran, including around the time of Jesus as was the case for the prophet John/Yahya, they primarily served the purpose of a reward and were not meant to be disclosed and shared openly other than within the circle of the people concerned. Jesus' birth not only was different than all others in its prominence because as already said, intercourse between a man and a woman did not even precede it, but also because it was primarily meant as a sign for all of humanity. As a testimony to this, the Quran uses a linguistic subtelty, showing again and again how it uses words surgically in order to maximize the impact. There is a slight different wording between God's answer to Mary 3:47"Even so Allah creates what he pleases" and to Zakariya 3:40"Even so does Allah whatsoever He pleases". The nuance -creates vs does- lies in that the miracle of a child born of a virgin is definately more striking than a child born to a couple, even if barren. It must be kept in mind the Quran was recited in the form of speech, publicly and instantly as it came to the prophet, with no chance a re-editing and modifying, and the 2 verses are very closely located. How would one, let alone a known illiterate without any background in poetry or any form of oral eloquent speeches, instantly and naturally make such a distinction in a flowing discourse?

    Quote
    saved by Allah on the crucifix and comes back on Judgement day?


    Jesus was never brought anywhere close to a crucifix. Jesus was honored and purified from the false charges of the disbelievers meaning his close entourage and few followers were informed of the truth about his last moments on earth, and his followers were later granted dominion over them 3:55"O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (mutawaffika) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so I will decide between you concerning that in which you differed".
    AtTawaffi is used in the Quran as well as everyday common speak to convey the idea of receiving fully;
    - either by the people who for example shall receive their full reward on the Day of Judgement 3:185,39:70
    - either by Allah when He receives the soul of the dead 6:61,8:50,10:104,16:70,32:11 more precisely in 22:5,5:117 or 40:67"He it is Who created you from dust..and of you there are some who are caused to die (yatawaffa).." or at the moment of sleep then returns it to the body before it is awake 39:42. As a side note, this a Jewish belief too, that the soul (or a portion of it) at night goes up to heaven and comes back before waking up.

    When Allah tawaffa Jesus, it therefore either means he was put to death or put to sleep before rafiuka/raising you up. It is to be noted that in Jewish tradition, the prophet Enoch was raised to God prior to his earthly death Gen5:22-4.
    The interpretation that Jesus died when Allah tawaffa him doesnt deny his coming back as a sign of Judgement Day or him being currently alive in the hereafter with Allah, as the ahadith allege. Because firstly all the dead are alive in barzakh awaiting the resurrection, and we also have examples in the Quran of dead people resurrected before Judgement Day such as the man/prophet 2:259 or the dead resurrected by God's will through Jesus 3:49, so the same could be done with Jesus if Allah wishes.
    On the other hand, to argue that Jesus did not die when Allah tawaffa him therefore leaves the second option that his soul was taken, then his body put to sleep, then raised and that once fully in the hereafter (body and soul), his soul was poured back into his body then awaken. 

    In all cases, Jesus was preserved from humiliation by Allah, honored and lifted up.

    As a side note, the Quran does not say that it was made to appear that Jesus died on the cross, ie purposefully by God. It answers in 4:157-8 their mockeries about having succeeded in killing a supposed prophet of God. It refutes their arrogance and reiterates Allah's unchanging way concerning the prevailing of His messengers/rusul, that leads God to destroy or forcefully subjugate that nation and preserve the messenger and the believers if men keep rejecting despite the clear warnings of destruction 58:20-21,48:22-23,36:26-32,40:51,77,43:42. The Messenger, along with those that are with the Messenger are saved, and those that are not perish. Among these messengers are Nuh, Hud, Ibrahim, Salih, Shuayb, Musa, Jesus and Muhammad.
    The verses 4:157-8 declare that contrary to those Jews' boastful claims, Jesus was not crucified NOR KILLED. This rebellious attitude towards Jesus and assumed hatred of him to the point that they even sarcasticaly call him a prophet in their mocking self-conviction can easily be understood if one considers the depiction that is made of them in the NT during Jesus' ministry, their vehement rejection of him, their request to the Roman authorities to crucify him regardless of them not finding any crime for executing him, even accepting to take the blame of murdering an innocent upon themselves and their own children Matt27:25. 

    The verses in the Quran however clearly dismiss whatever way the disbelievers attempted at Jesus' life, including their desire to crucify him as was common in those days, and they did attempt many ways 5:110. The object of the verses therefore isnt to deny the crucifixion specifically, nor to delve into the Christian, unbiblical dogmas surrounding it (like it being the necessary atonement for mankind's supposed sins and inherited depravity from Adam, all these indirectly addressed and refuted in verses establishing the principles of non-transmission of sins and individual accountability) but to negate the idea that Jesus' opponents succeeded in murdering him by any means, just like they were now attempting with the Ishmaelite prophet, as it would have defeated God's word and promise concerning the truthfulness of His prophets and their warnings. Jesus, the messenger sent with an undeniable manifestation of the Truth as well as clear warnings of destruction to befall his rejecters, was protected by Allah like others before him.

    This whole matter appeared so to Jesus' enemies because, among other reasons, Jesus was missing, or as the Quran says God "tawaffa" him, purified him and made him ascend to Heaven which prevented the humiliation that could happen if his enemies got to the body. If they presented it to the people in a humiliated state, leading to a psychological victory for the Israelites 4:158"Allah took him up to Himself". They couldnt even kill him, nor could they damage his body and God states He would raise him up to himself, meaning that not only his body wouldnt be humiliated but it would be honored by God instead. God lifted him up and did not leave a trace of him with them yet even without proof for their claims, they managed to start a rumor that quickly spread and was believed. A confusion similar to that of the rumor of the prophet Muhammad's death during the battle of Uhud 3:144, and easily understandable in the midst of the 100s of daily Roman crucifixions and executions of any agitators to the point that they would sometimes run out of wood for the crosses. This rumor they started found a favorable echo among the gentiles whom Paul was trying to lure contrary to Jesus' directives to preach only to the Israelites, and whose belief was Mithraism, a religion already spread all throughout Europe and Asia minor centuries prior to the birth of Christianity. This is the religion that found a favorable echo and adopted by the pagan Roman authority, who had centuries of tradition of dying and/or mutilated savior gods, and ultimately institutionalized. As the early church father Justin Martyr conceded "when  we say...Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified, died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propose nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you consider sons of Zeus".
    The sect that "won" and became "orthodoxy", among many early, conflicting Christian sects, as even reflected in Paul's letters and the desperate struggles he had with them to maintain control of his own congregations, achieved victory by political rather than epistemic means. The process was not a difficult one considering Mithraism's tendancy to accommodate with other rival cults, a character that proved to be a fatal weakness ultimately, and that would cause the disappearance of that cult in the face of Christian authoritarianism that did all to eradicate it and supplant it due to the disturbing similarities. Many Church Fathers (Justin, Origen, Tertullian) attempted rationalizing the fact that Mithraism had anticipated many Christian themes centuries before; "satanic imitations" being the standard explanation. Although the fine details of those similarities are now lost due to the Christian destructions of all "mithraes" they could put their hands on as well as persecute its followers, the presence of such vehement defenses by church authorities reveals their major embarrasement. Every historian on these and others early Christian theologians remarks on how regularly the surviving "orthodox" literature of the 2nd and 3rd centuries slanders opponents with exaggerated or even false charges, how they employed shunning and other acts of social intimidation rather than open debate, and how routinely complaints are heard of forged texts and other tools of deception in the ranks.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #495 - July 25, 2018, 11:09 PM

    someone asked

    Quote
    If Allah sent prophets to all people - did he reveal his message in Arabic or in a local language?


    Past Revelations sent to different locations and cultures were similarly sent in the clear language of the primary addressees 41:44,43:3,14:4"And We did not send any messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly" Ezek3:4-5"And He said to me; "Son of man, go, come to the house of Israel and speak to them with My words. For it is not to a people of an unfathomable language and a heavy tongue that you are sent, [but] to the house of Israel". Every messenger only spoke to his people with their own language, not a foreign one otherwise they might misunderstand "so that he might explain to them clearly". This doesnt exclude that the messenger might speak the language of another people or that he might be sent to another nation with a specific message to it. Some messengers were sent to foreign lands, as is Yunus/Jonah's case, an Israelite who went to the neighboring Assyrian kingdom as very briefly related in Jonah1-4 but also prophecied among his own people 2Kings14:25.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #496 - July 25, 2018, 11:10 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    Do you think it is ok for a 50 year old man to marry and have sex with a 9 year old girl?


    It is well documented in the works of historians that Aisha, along with all of Abu Bakr's children were born in Jahilliya, meaning there is no way possible she could have been less than 13 years old at the time of Hijra as some ahadith suggest. Incidently, the same Tabari (who never says Aisha was engaged to the prophet in her early years as stated in Bukhari), is used by ignorant critics, in denial of the above statement about her birth period, for one of his reports about the prophet not having consumed the marriage with Aisha immidiately after their engagement being due to his poor financial situation, instead of wanting her to first reach puberty as implied in Bukhari or Muslim. The insidious implication being that the prophet did not care whether she had reached puberty or not before uniting with her.
    In his paper that is essentially nothing but a re-hash of GFHaddad's arguments, Ayman b. Khalid, adds a sentence that is inexistant in Tabari's report: "So all four children were begotten by those two wives whom we mentioned that he married during the pre-Islamic period". The phrase "that he married" doesnt exist in the Arabic. Ayman b. Khaalid added it, on purpose to try and connect the timing (jaahiliya) to the marriages while it clearly is defining the time when "all four children were begotten".

    But let us consider the main quoted source for Aisha's alleged age of 9 when married, the book of "sahih" Bukhari.

    According to a narrative in sahih Bukhari the revelation of al qamar:46 occured when Aisha was a young girl/jariya. The chapter ends a mere 9 verses later at v55 and it is obvious from the topic that v46 to v55 were revealed together and could not have been cut off. So the argument that some suras were revealed in portions with long intervals of time in between verses is moot. Besides all scholars agree this is a Meccan sura, whose finalization the opinion varies between the 4th and 8th year of the call to prophethood. Ayman b. Khalid tries presenting a single view from an exegete (without quoting him) arguing that all of suratul qamar was revealed in Mecca except for 3 verses (which Ayman b. Khalid fails to mention obviously due to the fact that even this exceptional view doesnt support his attempt at insinuating that v46 was among those "late" verses). But even if we consider Aisha's traditionaly accepted date of birth in the 5th year of revelation as true, and in addition accept the latest estimation for the date when sura al-qamar was finalized on the 8th year of revelation as true, then this would mean Aisha was able to memorize with precision a verse and its reference when she was mearly 3, which is highly unlikely. Even if one were to accept Ayman b. Khalid's argument that the sura was revealed in stages (keeping in mind he offers no support for this view other than that of an exegete whom he fails to quote), thereby pushing further a year at most for the finalization of that short sura, it would imply that Aisha at most was 4 when she memorized a precise verse and its reference which is equally unlikely. 

    Other historians such as Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham say she accepted Islam before Umar, who himself converted in the 9th year of revelation according to the evidence brought by Ayman b. Khalid. These historians both say she was among the earliest converts. Ibn Ishaq places her at the 18th and ibn Hisham places her approximately at the 20th place chronologicaly. This takes us back during the 1st or at most the 2nd year of revelation. Aisha isnt supposed to have even been breathing at the time if she was truly born in the 5th year of revelation. Even if we assume that this date of birth is true, how can anybody reasonably argue that someone willingly accepts a religion 3 years later at 3 years old (ie before Umar's conversion in the 9th year)? 

    In Bukhari's Kitab-ul-Kafalat, Aisha describes her vivid memory of events that supposedly happenned when she was but an infant, such as Abu bakr's migration to Ethiopia in the 5th year of revelation meaning her birth could not have been later than the pre-islamic era, as confirmed in Tabari's reports.

    Before her union with the prophet she was engaged to Jubayr ibn Mut'im ibn Adi whose father was a vehement enemy of the prophet, before Abu Bakr accepted Islam. The engagement was broken off by Jubayr's father when Abu Bakr converted and planned to go to Abyssinia in the 5th year of revelation, the year of Aisha's alleged birth.

    She clearly relates herself as having played an active role during the migration, such as in getting the travelling goods together in such a highly tense situation per the narrations, making it highly unlikely for an 8 year old to have been acting in such a way. Again she describes herself how she reached Shajra along with the soldiers in the battle of Badr that took place in 2H and nobody under 15 years old was allowed to join the soldiers in the battlefield obviously to avoid being captured and raised as idol-worshippers or killed and become a problem for the army yet she is alleged to have been 9 or 10 at the time and in addition was so immature she was still playing with dolls according to Hisham ibn Urwa, meaning she had no business whatsoever in being at the battlefield. In fact there are reports of the prophet sending back some Muslim youths who tried, out of eagerness, to go along with the Muslim army. The very notion that the Prophet would set an age limit to 15 for people to participate in battle, but allow 9-10 year olds or 11 year old females to accompany the battlefield, especially in such situations, is against all common sense. Why would young men below 15 be forbidden to be at the battle-field, but 9-10 year old girls be allowed to take care of people wounded and on the verge of death. Does one think the Prophet would have exposed these girls to the chance of being captured and eventually mistreated and abused by masters who used to force their female slaves into prostitution?

    Ayman b. Khalid brings a few reports in an attempt to refute the notion that young, immature and pre-pubescent children were not allowed to be present in battles. He brings 2 reports none of which showing immature and prepubescent boys asking to participate in battles and their request being granted. His 1st report only shows that a ghulam (commonly used for a prepubescent child but can also be used idiomaticaly) had died during the battle of Badr. The young boy could have chosen to go by himself and in fact Ayman b. Khalid's 2nd report shows how 2 young boys (there is no indication about their age nor their sexual maturity in the Arabic) suddenly showed up alongside a Muslim soldier at the battle of Badr and how he was astonished and uneasy at their presence. In the same report, this soldier later refers to them as "rajul" which actually refutes Ayman b. Khalid's position that this 2nd report refers to prepubescent boys. It has absolutely no relevance to the point of establishing an age for the Muslims at the battlfield. One cannot but logically assume that none had given them the authorization to participate at the battle due to them adding more difficulties to the Muslim fighters, but that they, like the boy spoken of in the 1st report, went forth by themselves. 

    Anas further describes Aisha along with Umm Sulaim lifting their dresses up to avoid any hindrance in their movement, at the batttle of Uhud. The idea of lifting the dress in Arab tradition, as is evident in abundant pre-Islamic poetry is a reference to women fleeing the battlefield, having to raise their skirts exposing their shins. This is what happened in Uhud when Muslim men were panicking, because the unbelievers had sent them into disarray. It had reached such an extent that they abandoned the Prophet. Yet, here is a 'nine or ten year' old girl running back and forth, to various Muslim men assisting them with their needs in the midst of battle: “On the day (of the battle) of Uhud when (some) people retreated and left the Prophet, I saw Aisha daughter of Abu Bakr and Umm Sulaim, with their robes tucked up so that the bangles around their ankles were visible hurrying with their water skins (in another narration it is said, ‘carrying the water skins on their backs’). Then they would pour the water in the mouths of the people, and return to fill the water skins again and came back again to pour water in the mouths of the people”. How can people think that at the height of the battle, when Muslims were panicking and even leaving the Prophet, Aisha was 9-11 years old, not even slightly panicking attending bravely wounded soldiers, was one who played with dolls and a mere child when she was allowed to go into battle? Dont the narrations specifically tell us the Prophet constantly warned his men not to abandon their posts on the hill? If he was so keen about that matter and so keen on males being a specific age, what makes people think he was going to take females that would burden the army?
    The fact is Aisha actively participated in battles during the prophet's life, assisting the men at the battlefield along with other women, which is why by the time of Ali's reign as Caliph, she gathered enough experience and credibility that she could rally a huge fighting force.

    None of the narrations saying she was 6 when engaged and 9 when moved with the prophet come from Mecca or Medina and whether from Muslim or Bukhari's sahih books combined, it is the same hadith narrated in multiple ways, which refutes the position that Aisha's age is established by multiple reliable sources. Even the two hadith in Bukhari claiming that Aisha says her age are attributed to Hisham bin Urwa, so they arent even her own words. It is only in Muslim, in which the author tries to place the permissabilitiy of marrying young women are two hadith quoted which claim the words from Aisha, but they all report additional material from Hisham that arent reported in Bukhari. Bukhari doesnt record the hadith that claim to attribute the age to Aisha herself. All such narrations come from Iraq, even those outside sahih Bukhari, and the majority of those are traced to Hisham bin Urwa, Asma's grandson, meaning there is no possibility to verify whether Hisham was involved in those other reports where his name isnt mentionned in the chain, directly or indirectly. Even when Ayman b. Khalid tries finding reports on Aisha's age originating outside Iraq, he still quotes a hadith that includes Urwa in the chain of transmission. So it all goes back to one source ultimately who himself was married to a 9 year old according to his own supporter GFHaddad. In addition to this obvious bias, he is also reported by hadith scholars to have become unreliable in his Iraq period due to him falsifying transmision chains that allegedly came from his father while the sources were different as even modern supporters of his such as Ayman b Khalid concede. Even if one were to consider bin Urwa reliable for argument's sake, while his own student Imam Malik began considering his accounts unreliable in his Iraqi period, we would still be confronted to difficulties showing how any attempt at specificaly determining Aisha's marriage age is not based upon contradiction-free information.

    In his article, Khalid quotes a discussion from Tareekh Al-Islam between the historian Imam Adh-Dhahabi and Ibn Abee Az-Zinaad. The latter states Asma was 10 years older than Aisha yet we have bin Urwa claiming Asma lived until 100. Asma died in 73H (Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Ibn Kathir's Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah). If she was 100 in 73H according to bin Urwa himself then it means she was 27 at the time of Hijra. Consequently Aisha was 17 at the time and 18-19 when she married 1 or 2 years later. Knowing this difficulty to harmonize the records available with bin Urwa's, the historian Imam Adh-Dhahabi tries reducing Asma's age at death in order to make it fit with the reports on Aisha's marriage age "If this is true (Asma being 10 years older than Aisha), then the age of Asmaa when she passed away should be ninety-one".

    There are political implications in such hadith as well. Aisha opposed Ali, to the point she led the opposite party into battle. Iraq and Kufa were the real centers of political turmoil and the people of Medina especially did not trust them. They further 'claimed' allegiance to the Family of the Prophet, yet we know how 'true' they lived up to their claims. The painting of her as a 'child' and 'not responsible', and one to play with dolls, in the context of who was right and wrong doesnt need to be dwelled upon to understand the motivations of certain narrators.

    Public criticism, according to the tradition, was laid at Umar for his trying to marry Fatima, because she was young and Umar was old, almost the same age difference between the Prophet and Aisha. In fact, the traditions record that this was one of the objections of Ali for the union and public criticism had gotten to the point Umar had to defend himself for the move in public. Umar made the point that he only wanted to marry her to affirm his ties with the House of the Prophet. Umar didnt use the precedent of the Prophet marrying Aisha at an alleged young age. Also, if it was a norm of Arab culture, then why would he draw the criticism of the city of Medina for such an act? Further, in the Muwatta which is the representative work on the school of Medina, in the chapter on marrying younger women without asking them, this narration isnt even reported. And you would think, in Medina of all places, the marriage of the Prophet to a young Aisha would serve an evidence for the people of Medina. Where are the examples to substantiate the point of view that such practice was a norm in Arab culture? An interesting point to re-stress is that not only are there no examples to show how such practice was a norm, but also it is reported by GFHaddad that Urwa, the ultimate source of these traditions regarding Aisha's age, just so happenned to have married a 9year old. Besides his poor memory at the time he reported Aisha's age, there is now another reason to seriously doubt his credibility, namely the blatant need to falsify a hadith to serve his interest in justifying an act that far from being the "norm" of the prophet's time, was unacceptable to many including the prophet's own entourage.

    The prophet Muhammad proposed to her father Abu Bakr at a time when Muslims were facing the most tormented time of their history. Muslims had to be closer than ever and the Prophet, after being rejected by all influential men and tribes had to strengthen his ties with his few companions. Abu Bakr was still a respected man among the Quraysh and could therefore provide Muhammad with some protection. After Khadija's death, he thus asked Aisha's hand.

    In Christian tradition, it is reported Joseph at 90 married Mary who was 12 which is the double age difference than that of Muhammad when he allegedly married Aisha.
    1. Church leaders that argued what was inerrant and what was not, never challenged the age, and the evidence points to them accepting it, as the Catholic Enyclopedia states.
    2. Not a single 'apocrypha' scripture was rejected based upon the age of Joseph marrying Mary.
    3. Just because an apocrypha was rejected, does not mean it was rejected for all of it's contents. For example, the same Apocrypha can say that Jesus was born in a stable and 3 wise-men came and visited her. Is this story 'false' because it's in Apocrypha?
    4. One man's apocrypha is another man's scripture, thus the example of the book of Revelation, among other books, being rejected as apocrypha until later on.
    5. As a side note, what is the minimum age of virgins allowed to be taken as war captives in Num31?

    Muslims passed over this information on Aisha's age without paying much attention to it for long because they know, as any intelligent person, that the documentation of age is not that strong in Arab culture meaning one cannot consider the number itself very accurate. If one is not born in a landmark year then they can loose track, so establishing a precise age is something impossible to do. However, all of these refutations point to a possibility of late teenage years, and surely rule out nine.
    Even if one accepts the alleged argument that Aisha said she was nine, under what basis do we even accept it, considering they didnt track their birth dates then and their are no birth certificates. Even if one assumes the narration is correct, how does one remember the age? Do you remember events tying them to the fact you were six years old, even grand events, especially when you have no knowledge of the significance of it? Yes, I can rememebr my mother badly beating me one day, but what I remember is the fact she beat me, not the age at which she beat me.
    It is only when someone makes the ridiculous claim that the age of 9 is a 100% certainty, and uses it to fuel hatred, lies and ignorance (forgetting what his own tradition asserts concerning the marriage of the mother of "god") that Muslims must show the falsity of the claim, as is done above using both the Quran that states in sura nisaa that marriage can only occur when one reaches maturity/rushd and puberty/balagh, as well as extra-Quranic sources. Besides, to argue that the issue regarding the age of Aisha is in response to Western cultural values is to ignore what was already stated centuries before concerning criticism in the shia literature of Umar wanting to marry Ali's daughter, with the criticism being that she was young and he was too old. Whether the narration is fabricated to make Umar look bad by shia is irrelevant, the reality is, it still attests to a stigma that would have to exist to make Umar look bad. Another important thing to keep in mind is that much of the criticisms of the age of Aisha from ahl al hadith, ie the very ones who uphold hadith books is mainly aimed against shia literature and their attempts to paint Aisha as incapable, playing with dolls, leading a nation into war based on her immaturity.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #497 - July 25, 2018, 11:11 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    Do you acknowledge that Muhammad ordered adulterers to be stoned to death? *shows hadith which state this*
    Do you think it is right to stone people to death?


    Per the Quran, the punishment for adultery and fornication is 100 lashes for both men and women who are considered equally guilty 24:2-3. This shows that contrary to popular belief, stoning to death is a Biblical command, not a Quranic one, just as honor killing found in Gen34:1,31. The commands regarding the laws on adultery are preceded by an admonishement to the reader about the compulsive nature of the sura as well as its clear message. It is a a solemn warning against any attempt at widening or re-defining its injuctions. This refutes the traditions holding that the adulters must be stoned to death. According to certain accounts, Aisha was accused of adultery. Those involved in passing the rumours were not just hypocrities, but Muslims like Hassan bin Thabit, meaning it 'qualified' as acceptable in hadith methodology as far as isnad is concerned. The Quran stated equivocally, that instead of this news was passed from tongue to tongue, the Muslims should have declared it a fabrication from the very outset. The principle is just because something is mentioned in 'numbers', doesn't mean 'valid'. The content of the report is a huge factor in determining whether something is acceptable or not and the notion that because something is narrated by a group of people does not make it any stronger. In fact, sometimes scholars woul say the numercitiy of the report indicates its falsehood. Even the NT records that rumors were passed off regarding Jesus during his own life.

    Physical punishement is followed by social alienation of those that are proven guilty and do not decisively repent and mend their ways: future marriages of those convicted of fornication are only to be with those that were convicted of fornication. In the process of delivering the prescribed punishment, no leniency is permitted. As a general rule in all offences, when the crime or offence is proved prior to the guilty repenting and mending his/her way, decisiveness and firmness of rule must be observed, and false sentiments, which harm the system of society, must be put away.
    As stated in 4:25, the physical punishement is to be halved in case of certain weak and uneducated women who were raised in particular difficult social conditions ie the mulk yamin. If the punishment for adultery was death by stoning, then the very idea of halving the punishment of free woman would be absurd, ie stoning to death cannot be halved. This verse also establishes that the social context of one caught should be taken into account, at least as far as the Quran is concerned.
    The only time the Quran allows death to a crime as an extreme measure, among other severe measures, is murder 2:178 and spreading corruption in the land 5:33. And even in such cases, as well as others like theft (Everyone who is aware of the linguistic principles of the Arabic language knows that the words sariq (masc) and sariqa (fem) are adjectives and denote thoroughness and completeness in the characteristics of the word they qualify. Consequently, they can only be used for the type of sarqa which can be called a theft and the one who commits it is called a thief. Further SARIQ has in its linguistic meaning the suggestion that the person stole something that was reasonable protected) where violent punishment is prescribed 5:38-40, physical punishement and death is only used against criminals who insist on transgression before the government is able to seize them and has to actually subdue them by force. However, criminals who repent and mend their ways before any action by the government shall be dealt with differently. It also is important to note that the severity of the punishment is proportional to the degree of social security guaranteeing the basic needs of every individual, as per Islamic law.

    So the only way to reconcile the various traditions speaking of adulters being stoned to death with the Quran is that those cases of zina (adultery/fornication) fell under spreading corruption in the land (prostitution, rape), and werent reported accurately.
    The whole point of punishments in Islam is to avoid spreading sins and protecting the society as a whole. For example after mentionning the law of retaliation in case of murder, the Quran says that such law is meant to "give life", ie to securize society because it is a powerful deterrant and another means of remaining God-conscious (taqwa) 2:178-9.
    Zina is viewed in Islam, especially when made public as in the case spoken of in sura 24, as one of the worst sins due to its vicious ramifications. The punishement for it is at the level of its seriousness and given the severity of the punishement, a false accusation or an accusation not supported by 4 truthfull eyewitnesses results in 80 lashes for the accuser whose tuthfulness in matters of testimony will never be taken into account in the future 24:4,33:58 except for the one who sincerely repents, ie publicly withdraws his false accusation, and mends his ways 24:5. Repentence however will not exempt the guilty from physical punishement, which is the victim's legal right and which in addition discourages false testimonies as well as mere circumstantial evidence, almost putting a stop to false accusations, slander and gossip. As can be seen the Quran in matters of chastity goes to great extents to protect the integrity of the righteous members of the community and the spread of sexual misbehavior; first, in the case of proven cases, by providing a strong deterrent and second, in the case of calumnies, by providing a mechanism through which the potential accuser can hardly succeed in his/her scheme, risking bigger repercussions on the accuser than the accused. As a linguistic observation, it is worthwhile noting the Quran's eloquent choice of words as it even safeguards the victim of a slander by omitting the accusation of fornication and instead speaking of its harmful effects, with the word yarmuna, picturing one being pelted and injured. In fact the burden of proof demanded by the Quran is set at a nearly impossible threshold and as is clarified in our works of legal procedure, based upon Prophetic guidance, the burden upon Muslim judges in cases of zina is not conviction, but getting the individual to recant from their confession - as confession is indeed the only way a person can practically be convicted of zina    in the sharia - and enjoining them to repent and live fruitful lives. I.e. What Jesus did in the NT. Because four people would have to be eyewitnesses to the adultrous/fornication act, then how could four people possibly see them unless they were either commiting their lewdness with the intention of being seen by others (pornography, orgies, etc.) or so headless that they were not concerned with whether or not someone sees them. Neither of these two thing occur except in societies that have become extremely corrupt in regards to sexual morality. It is to be noted however, that the act of fornication, like all sins, remains unlawful even if hidden from the public 6:120"And abandon outward sin and the inward one; verily those who commit sin soon shall be recompensed with what they used to commit".

    As a side note, zina/sex outside the legal bonds, is included as a fahisha but not all fahisha are zina. Fahisha means anything that is abominable, morally reprehensible, in words or deeds. In 4:15-16 we read of what is to be done in cases of fahisha in general. The guilty woman if convicted and her crime attested by 4 witnesses must be restrained, ie prevented from continuing down her course, in a house "until death takes them or Allah makes a path for them". The "path" being, as said in the following verse, forgiveness and freedom in case of sincere repentance and reform. This is in contrast to the prophet-king David's alleged perpetual and unconditional imprisonnement of his unfaithful concubines 2Sam20:3. Should the woman not show any signs of reform and insists in her will to misbehave even during the period of restrainement, then she is to undergo an unspecified physical punishement (to be determined according to the judge's discretion, depending on the crime, for example if the fahisha is adultery/zina then the type of punishement is specified in sura 24) to be interrupted as soon as repentance and a clear will to mend her ways are expressed. Should the punishement not deterr her or awaken her conscience, then she is to remain in a life of confinement and occasional physical punishement until she decides to stop, repent and mend her ways. The man who is convicted and his crime testified by 4 witnesses must immidiately undergo physical punishement, in contrast to women who are allowed a time of reflexion prior, to be interrupted if sincere repentance and will to reform are expressed.
    The only fahisha for which the Quran in sura 24 specifies that the guilty must be publicly punished is adultery/zina, obviously because it is an evil with far reaching damaging effects within the society. The guilty is made to face the most pious elements of the community during the process "a part of those who have made themselves safe/almu'minin" in order to alert his conscience to the fact that his evil is one that threatens all uprightness, goodness in a comunity. It is interesting to not here the Quran's stress on the righteousness of the witnesses, those who are the least prone to such transgressions, which bellies the idea that the public nature of the punishement is meant as a deterrent to other potential sinners. Rather, the idea of undergoing a severe physical punishment coupled with the humiliation of being exposed to the known pious members of the community is the deterrent. The eyewitnesses to the punishment also serve as a lever to control both the judge and the executer.

    Then up to verse 19 the sura noor/24 goes on propounding on the great sin that is the slandering of righteous people, propagating unfounded allegations of immoral conduct 33:70"be careful of (your duty to) Allah and speak the right word" 49:12"avoid most of suspicion, for surely suspicion in some cases is a sin, and do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? By no means, [since] you would hate it". The honor of a Muslim brother is likened to the flesh of his dead body and putting him into disgrace leads to backbiting and exposing secrets is similar to consumption of his flesh. Making mention of ‘dead body’ is owing to the fact that backbiting is done behind people’s back in the same manner that the dead are unable to defend themselves. It clearly tells to assume the best rather than the worst in people, unless there are solid reasons for suspicion, especially if they are from one's own comunity 24:12-18 because following rumors and conjecturing on people is an evil act that must be avoided at all costs for the day will come where man's own senses shall testify to what they conjectured about 17:36. It emphasizes the inviolability of each person's home and private life, including the privacy of public figures 49:4-5,24:27-29. This is to the extent that one of the early caliphs suspected that a particular individual was committing adultery, jumped over his wall and caught him in the act. The man protested that even the caliph had no right to spy on him in this manner, to which the caliph relented, continued his inspection of the city and mentioned nothing of the man's identity to anyone. The Quran reforms society in matters of preservation of sexual morality in the most intricate of ways, not only through issuing threats of sanctions and punishments. In sura nur, the sura of chastity, begins with the act of flogging and punishment of adulterer and adulteress, and covers the issues such as paving ground for a sound marriage, observing Islamic veiling, prohibiting ogling, banning the act of accusing people to unchaste pollution, and, finally, children's taking permission at the time of entering parents’ room. Even immature children are taught not to enter the parents’ room without permission at least at three special times (before morning ritual prayer, after night prayer, and at noon time when parents are taking rest).

    In a married couple, if the husband suspects his wife of adultery without being able to produce eyewitnesses then he is to take an oath and invoke Allah's curse on himself if he is lying, the wife in turn may deny the charges in the same manner and none will be punishable for adultery 24:6-10. This shows that a woman's testimony is equal in weight to that of a man. The same procedure would be adopted in a reverse case.   
    In the Bible Numbers5:11-31, a husband suspecting his wife of adultery or simply having feelings of jealousy does not have to take an oath that he is truthfully accusing her, it is the wife that is almost considered guilty by suspicion and who is made to undergo a ritual pertaining to the "law of jealousy". She is to be taken to the priest, along with an offering from her husband, where she is put under oath and God's curse is invoked on her if she is guilty. She is humiliated through the "loosening of her hair" (a bared head is considered a disgrace to a Jewish woman) and made to drink of a cursed, bitter water that will supposedly cause her intense suffering and possibly death in case she is lying.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #498 - July 25, 2018, 11:12 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    4. Do you believe that it is wrong for Muslims to force members of another religion to pay money to Islam in the form of a jizya tax?


    The jizya is a collective tax, not a head tax, whose amount is agreed upon by mutual consultation. And the benefits which the government offers are matters of communal and national interest - defending the territory from outside aggression, establishing security, maintaining the environment, building infrastructure, etc., not the sort of benefits you can opt out of. So even though it is not a personal head tax, for the sake of argument, you can either pay taxes, go to jail or leave the country. Pretty much the same thing which nation-states demand. Jizya in addition exempts non Muslims, or dhimmi, of the laws, rights, obligations, penalties etc of that state religion in matters that do not concern the society as a whole. That is because the sharia for Muslim governance of non-Muslim citizens is that non-Muslims should not be forced to follow the moral laws dictated in the Quran. Thus, Muslims of all ages and empires, prior to contemporary Islamism had an understanding that non-Muslims should be left essentially to govern themselves, after their commitment to maintaining peace and living by the rule of law is established. Hence, Muslims in places like India, Spain and Malaya were minorities who ruled over much larger non-Muslim populations, who formed the bulk of their armies and civil administrations in many situations.
    As said above, in a secular state the issue is pretty much the same. Special taxes will apply to alien residents, who in addition to having to compensate the state for providing them with benefits of all kind, must also exempt themselves from the obligations and rights that apply to the citizen of that state (military service, various taxes on salaries, financial regulations etc). So, just as in a religious state, if they want the right to live as aliens with a different set of laws than the state's then they need to compensate the government for giving them that right, in addition to having to contribute to the maintenance of the benefits they daily enjoy. Paying that tax will protect them from being pursued and punished by that government and should they rebel against the laws of that host state then they will be forcefully made to pay the taxes in ackowledgment of their submission. Jizya wasnt aimed at enriching anyone, contrary to the divinely blessed taxation and hoarding of riches and spoils by king David and his appointed governors in his conquests which he dedicated to the building of national religious edifices (on the ruins of other people's) 2Sam8,1Chr18:2,6,8,13,20:1-2,26;26-7 and personal glory as well 2Sam12:29-31, as was later done by his successor the wise king and prophet Solomon in line with the rules of the monarchy dictating that the king's expenditures (a "heavy yoke" that ultimately caused the scission of the kingdom of Israel after Solomon's death 1Kings12) should be collected from all people under his dominion 1Sam8:11 (some exemples of the daily rights, gifts and luxuries of the Jewish monarch to be brought forth by conquered nations in 1Kings5:1-7,9:14-15,27-28,2Chr27:5), whose similiarily appointed representents collected his levy from Jews and non-Jews, the difference between the 2 groups being that when the conquered nations could not pay they were reduced to forced labor 1Kings9:21. Contrary to this subduing system aimed at benefiting a party and lowering another, going back to the days of Joshua (Josh16:10) and before, jizya partly financed the functioning of a society in which those who paid it were fully part of.
    Some insidious critics like calling it "protection money" but the fact is every taxation system in the world can be termed "protection money" since the failure in paying results in punishment from the governement, whether they be citizen or not.
    Under that system non Muslims are obviously favored since they enjoy a sort of autonomy within a state and may live by the regulations of their own religions as long as these do not create a conflict with the state religion (drinking alcohol privately for example). They may deliberate, individualy deny, or reform their religious laws to their liking and to fit their desires without any concern about the laws of the state, again, so long as no conflict occurs between the 2.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #499 - July 25, 2018, 11:12 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    5. Are non-Muslims who reject Muhammad and resist Islamic rule considered to be "innocent persons" in Islam?


    Resistance to the rule of any nation in which one willingly lives is a crime
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #500 - July 25, 2018, 11:13 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    6. Do you believe women should have the same rights as men?


    Keeping in mind the  verses regarding gender equality in conjugal rights and in Allah's sight Who does not make any gender, racial, social dinstinction except in their taqwa/God consciousness and devotion to Him 4:1,25:77,34:37,42:23,49:13"We have created you of a male and a female..the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is he who is most righteous of you", Islam does not represent favoritism in the interest of men. Precedence is given toward the general welfare of society, not genders.
    The Quran promotes the fact that, as human beings, men and women are equal and deserve equal respect. However, men naturally must excel women in certain social aspects when they fulfill a specific condition, that of financial maintainers of a household 4:34"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded". Wives are told to be Qanitatun (devoted to Allah as used all over the Quran for men and women alike 33:31,35,66:5 or for Mary who did not have a husband 66:12) in that she must accept God's command and acknowledge her duties pertaining to conjugal relations towards her husband who is in turn bound by Allah to provide for her due to what God has favored him with, ie financial favors 4:32-4"And do not covet that by which Allah has made some of you excel others...Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property". This conditional superiority of men over women specifically in the context of authority in a household that a man is able to sustain, is in stark contrast with the unconditional and general, divinely appointed state of subjugation of women to men as a matter of punishement for having allegedly brought about mankind's fall from grace Gen3:16"And to your husband will be your desire, and he will rule over you".

    Each gender therefore has rights and obligations adapted to his/her role. That role is not fixed in society.

    She "guards the unseen" by preserving all matters pertaining to conjugal relations and all personal affairs of the household. The wife is told to be qanita/obedient to Allah's command, and made "obliged" in these matters just "as Allah has guarded", ie in answer to Allah's favor Who has guaranteed her matrimonial rights.
    Men are also a degree above them in terms of obligations 2:228"and they (women) have rights similar to those against them in a just manner, and the men are a degree above them". This typical concise Quranic style actually reads "And the rights of the wives—in relation to their husbands—are equal to their obligations—toward their husbands—but men in their obligations—toward their wives—stand a step further". During the 3 months obligatory waiting period prior to a divorce, the current husband has more right than another proposer to take their wives back should there be a real desire for reconciliation "and their husbands have a better right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for reconciliation".
    Those 2 verses which are the foundation of matrimonial relationships also absolve women from the obligation of sustaining the family financially, in order to allow her full dedication to what is regarded as the most important task in a Muslim household: to raise a morally upright and respectable family. By securing her means of support, Islam lightens the burden of child bearing the aspect in which women are viewed superior to men.
    These standard guidelines are not absolute; there is a choice in the matter. If both partners mutually agree on their lifestyle, then they are within their rights to live their lives as they deem fit, as long as it does not contradict the rules of Islam.
    Women in Islam whether married, unmarried, divorced, or widowed, are never obligated to work for their livelihood. If she is single or divorced, her father secures her provisions. If her father is deceased, then her brother provides for her etc. The fact the Quran prefers a patriarchal society isnt a compulsion; if a wealthy woman opted to sustain her husband, she may. She may pursue her professional ambitions if she wishes, as long is it doesnt interfere with the husbands religious rights and her religious duties.
    4:34"the good women are therefore obedient", here the obedience is only limited within the religious perimeter meaning if the husband makes a request allowed by Islam, within his rights and if it were within her ability, then the wife should cooperate and adhere to the request.
    The man's religious rights over his wife are: Haqq-al-ta’a meaning the husband can require the wife to comply with her religious and moral duties and she may refuse any injuction contrary to Islamic law, Haqq-l-istimta’a which is his physical enjoyement provided she is psychologically well and not in the state of menstruating, post-childbirth, illness, hajj performances, and obligatorily fasts and prayers, and Haqq-al-maiyah which is her obligation to spend time with the husband in a form of companionship and friendship.
    The wife's rights upon her husband are: Nafaqa which is the financial covering of a wide list of personal and familial materials, Haqq-al-irwa`al-jinsi which means physical fulfillment in intimacy and playful actions before such as displaying of love and affection, some traditions relate the importance of both being satisifed after physical intercourse. The Prophet once said, “When a man approaches his wife he should not hasten until she is satisfied because women have needs” also “You men must make yourselves tidy and be prepared for your wives, as you would like them to be prepared for you” about the importance of the husband being well groomed for his wife, as a sign of love and respect. Muthajia meaning physical presence and sharing the common bed (not necesserarly for intercourse).
    4:19"live with them on a footing of kindness and equity" sums up perfectly the attitude a man must have with his wife.
    When there is quarelling and one of them feels his rights are infringed then they may seek an arbitrer from both sides 4:35"And if you fear a breech between the two, then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people"

    These matrimonial rights are not to be adhered to verbatim, their goal is to secure or enforce eachone's rights in case of disagreements, or as guidance to advise or solve certain problems. Every individual is within his or her right, before the marriage contract, to accept or reject any of the rights stipulated.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #501 - July 25, 2018, 11:14 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    Should Muslim women be free to marry whomever they choose and wear what they want?


    The Quran refers to marriage as a covenant/mithaq 4:21. As there can be no agreement unless both parties give their consent to it, marriage in Islam can only be contracted with the free consent of the two parties. The fiqh of even the classical schools argue that a female needs to be consulted regarding her marital status. There is absolutely no such concept as a forced marriage in Islam and every female enters into the contract willingly and mentally capable to understand the situation she is getting into.

    The issue of women covering up is present in both the Quran and Christian scriptures 1Cor11:6"For if a woman will not veil herself then she should cut off her hair, but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil...for man was not created from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man". The HB states in addition, an indescrete woman, regardless of her physical beauty and attire is as disfigured as a swine with a golden ring around its snout Prov11:22.
    The Quran directs both men and women to dress and behave modestly in public and whenever opposite sexes outside the familiar circle interract 24:30-31. It is important to mention, the Quran doesnt forbid or negate interraction between the 2 genders but regulates it with modesty, chastity. This is clear through the wording 24:30-31"yaghuddun min absarihim/to cast down of/from their look" its not saying to avoid looking altogether but to avoid staring, men and women alike. There is a reason why even modern secular societies, which do not impose modesty and censorship in interraction between the genders and who in consequence experience tension, including harrasements, as well as clashes between sexes are resorting more and more to physical seperations between the 2 in the public sphere in order that each may freely thrive to their potential.
    The Quran uses the term Khumur when speaking of the women's veil. It was a scarf used for covering during the prophet's time. Elsewhere it uses Julbab 33:59 which was an article of the same kind.
    The 2 essential reasons given by scholars for the reason of hijab are to protect and defend women, as well as society. Covering is a form of protection, maintenance of chastity, and aid in the avoidance of negative temptations in society for women and men alike by providing a dimension of moral character and dignity. With the hijab, men regard women in a dignified manner and value them for their character, intelligence, moral qualities “That they should be known as such and not molested”33:59. It is well known that the adoption of such a dress code leads to more positive body image, less reliance on media messages about beauty ideals, and appearance than those who do not. To emphasize the fact women are to be appreciated for something else than looks, respected and not looked at a lustful manner, men are to 24:30"cast down from their looks", an injunction from God before adressing even the issue of wearing the hijab, putting therefore first the responsibility on men to behave towards an equal human being created from the same essence 4:1. The veil speaks on her behalf, indirectly implying she doesnt want to be approached indecently but the wearing of hijab must be coupled with a modest attitude which is implied in the following allegory “They should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments”24:31. This applies to men too who are told to "guard their modesty"24:30 even prior to these injunctions to women.
    There are 3 levels of display of a woman's physical features: in public she should wear the khumur and julbab, among the immediate family members or only females she can unveil her hair but should be covered to at least under the knees, and in private quarters with her husband she should be uninhibited and free to reveal any part of her body. She may take it off in public, in her advanced years 24:60.
    The veil is far from being a form of subjugation rather it is the degradation of women judged on their looks and overexposed physically, in the Western media which is a form of subordination and insulting to women.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #502 - July 25, 2018, 11:15 PM

    Will continue with the remaining questions at a later time.
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #503 - July 26, 2018, 11:36 AM

    Will continue with the remaining questions at a later time.


    Huh!  More Gas??  Gaston Stop that foul....it is smelling bad..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #504 - July 27, 2018, 12:07 PM

    Someone asked

    Quote
    7. Hamas has deliberately murdered hundreds of Israeli civilians, including children, and left hundreds more with physical disability, mental impairment (from brain damage) and chronic pain.  They have also killed Americans.  Do you condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization?


    Yes, when they directly or indirectly harm/kill those that have not been actively engaged in opressing and harming them. Their Israeli enemy, although using different methods, is just as guilty of terrorism as them, when they equally harm and kill, directly or indirectly, those that have not been actively engaged in opressing and harming them.

    Now as to the wider issue of physical struggle/jihad, we have to analyze the context of its use in the times of the last prophet and before.

    It is the unalterable law of God that when He sends a messenger in a people, these particular people are left with no option, but to hearken His warnings and calls during an interval of time whose expiry can not be hastened nor delayed except by Allah 15:5,16:61,53:58. Allah states about this period that His messengers show the community, starting from the leaders in mischief greatly responsible for the general moral degradation of their people down to the poorest and most insignificant elements of the community 17:16,73:11 the signs of the truth in the heavens and earth, as well as in their own deepest selves 41:53,51:27 to the point that the people must recognize it and mend their evil ways.

    They are seized with affliction or tried with a sign from God when they reject the messenger 11:52-60,64-68 sent to them in order to humble themselves and mend their ways 7:94. They are urged to reason and ask for God's forgiveness lest the fate of past sinful nations each greater than other in might 43:8, to whom God's messengers were sent with the bayinat ie the undeniable evidence and signs befalls them, and they are uprooted by a grasp so encompassing and violent that it is pictured as beginning from their foundations (the area one would naturally be inclined to seek shelter in during a calamity) up 16:26,40:22,18:55,22:42-8"And if they reject you, then already before you did the people of Nuh and Ad and Samood reject (prophets). And the people of Ibrahim and the people of Lut, As well as those of Madyan and Musa (too) was rejected, but I gave respite to the unbelievers, then did I overtake them, so how (severe) was My disapproval. So how many a town did We destroy while it was unjust, so it was fallen down upon its roofs, and (how many a) deserted well and palace raised high. Have they not travelled in the land so that they should have hearts with which to understand, or ears with which to hear? For surely it is not the eyes that are blind, but blind are the hearts which are in the breasts. And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and Allah will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you number. And how many a town to which I gave respite while it was unjust, then I overtook it, and to Me is the return".

    Mankind is continuously encouraged to research and analyse the history of past nations, unavoidably seeing in it the divine pattern. Being the only extensive evidential base for the contemplation and analysis of how societies function, history then leads to moral reform, providing a backround for one to test his own moral sense against that of individuals and societies of the past when faced with similar complex situations. The past causes the present, and so the future.

    This shows that even in this life, the Creator's relationship with man is not merely based on the physical law, as with other creatures devoid of moral accountability and freewill but the moral law also is working side by side with it. The application of the moral law consequently to the humans' moral acts itself points to the truth that a time must come in this kingdom when on the completion of man's role in the physical world full results of his moral acts should also appear strictly in accordance with the moral law because in the physical world they do not appear fully.
     
    Some of these nations completely mend their ways during their time of respite and prior to their annihilation by Divine affliction, as happenned in the prophet Jonas' lifetime during which they all believed 10:98"When they believed, We removed from them the chastisement of disgrace in this world's life and We gave them provision till a time". If they dont and in addition try uprooting or killing the messengers sent to them with the undeniable bayinat, continuously oppose them and conspire against them to prevent the establishement of the way of God 42:13 then those who are finally and definately pointed as the guilty ones by the prophets 44:22 in these nations will incure Divine affliction through several means ranging from being put to the sword by the believers themselves as in Moses and Muhammad's time, to complete annihilation by natural cataclysms, to the sending of a powerful ennemy to bring destruction as happened to Jesus' nation, or the subjugation of the rejecters to the followers of the messengers for generations to come. Concerning this reality, the Psalmist states Ps46:9"Go and see the works of the Lord, that He has wrought devastation in the earth".

    As regards the first option, the Quran retells the stories of past nations who were ordained, against a mightier ennemy and with God's help, to uproot unrighteousness and establish the will of God in a specific land. Such was the case with the Israelites back in the times of Moses who were commanded to cleanse the blessed land of Canaan from its unrighteous dwellers, to Saul/Talut and David 2:246-252, down to the Ishmaelites and the cleansing of the ancient temple of monotheism in Mecca by Muhammad from its unworthy guardians who had swayed into the ways of polytheism and prevented the re-establishement of the original way of Ibrahim 22:40-1"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. And had there not been Allah's repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah´s name is much remembered; and surely Allah will help him who helps His cause; most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty. Those who, should We establish them in the land, will keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and enjoin good and forbid evil; and Allah´s is the end of affairs".

    So just like it was ordained to Muhammad and the Children of Ishmael, Allah previously ordered in the days of Moses and the prophets of the children of Israel to fight in His way for specific purposes Deut1:41,Deut7,9:4-6,12:1-3,20:16-18 and allthroughout Deuteronomy where the Israelites are commanded to cleanse the land from idolatry, and later on through the succeeding prophets that were similarly ordered to transmit God's will of purging evil from the land, by the sword without holding back whether it involves killing Jews or non Jews as prophecised in Isa1:25, and whether the ones doing the task are Jews or not as stated in Jer48:10 concerning the Chaldeans sent to destroy the Moabites "Cursed be he who performs the Lord's work deceitfully, and cursed be he who withholds his sword from blood" or the Assyrians of Sennacherib raised by God and through whom He destroyed, exiled and enslaved the Kingdom of Israel Amos6:11-14 or the Babylonians of Nebuchadnezzar whom God calls His servant for being the performer of His will, sent firstly to inflict massacre upon the Israelites for their repeated transgressions, and then upon those Ammonites and Edomites that occupied the holy lands and reintroduced idolatry Jer25:9,49:19. Later on it would be the non-Jew Cyrus, king of Persia who would be divinely aroused and commanded to wage war against the Babylonians until their defeat, expulsion from the holy land and the return of the Jews to Israel Jer50:14-21,51:1,53.  

    In the case of the prophet Muhammad it was prophecied that the unrighteous ones perpetuating the spiritual corruption of the sacred land in which God's will was to be re-established, will try exiling him and his followers so consequently they will be ultimately uprooted from the land they had complete dominion over 17:76-7.

    Besides the people of Jonas/Yunus practically all nations to whom messengers were sent with such warnings faced the punishment of death and sometimes complete annihilation as described for the messengers of old throughout sura 7 and 11,26,29,40:5,14:13-15,58:5"Surely those who act in opposition to Allah and His Messenger shall be laid down prostrate as those before them were laid down prostrate; and indeed We have revealed clear communications, and the unbelievers shall have an abasing chastisement" 26:208-9"And We did not destroy any town but it had (its) warners, To remind, and We are never unjust". This divine scourge does not befall the sinful nation so long as all the righteous and the prophets have fled the land 4:165,8:33,11:58,12:110,17:15,19:46-50,20:77,28:59.

    God does not directly interact with the people, he in the first instance sends Messengers to a nation, human or else, to whom the people are given time to present all their objections and make up their minds. During this time the messengers and their followers have to show patience and perseverance in the face of all persecution and do their utmost with God's guidance to make good and bad, truth and falsehood perfectly clear 17:15"..nor do We chastise until We raise a messenger" 8:33"nor is Allah going to chastise them while yet they ask for forgiveness". The Messengers are a means of communicating the truth of God in such an ultimate form to their addressees that they are left with no legitimate excuse to deny it, especially considering the perseverance of their prophets with the hope of bringing them back from their spiritual degeneration 46:27. If their efforts are unable to influence them, then it only means that nothing can change and reform them. The messengers therefore remove all excuses the rejecters might have on the Day of Resurrection 20:134"And had We destroyed them with chastisement before this, they would certainly have said: O our Lord! why didst Thou not send to us a messenger, for then we should have followed Thy communications before that we met disgrace and shame" and any excuse they might have for the just punishement they will imminently face in this world for their rejection 21:109"But if they turn back, say: I have given you warning in fairness and I do not know whether what you are threatened with is near or far". This particular point of warning the nation to an extent that its continuous rejection becomes inexcusable before the sending of the divine scourge, is demonstrated through the story of the prophet Jonas/Yunus who left his people/qawm in wrath thinking the time of the divine chastisement had come due to their refusal to hearken his repeated calls and was stopped in his journey by God Himself who mercifully returned him to his people whose time of respite hadnt expired and who ultimately all ended up believing in him before the sending of the scourge 10:98,21:87-8,37:139-148. The manner in which he was brought back to his people was nothing short of miraculous, a display of God's favor to the righteous and pious as well as a demonstration that God's mercy and forgiveness are open to all so long as their time of respite hasnt come to an end. After he was designated as the one to be thrown to the sea by the boat's crew members, he was swallowed by a sea creature, and would have tarried in it till the day of resurrection in the way we see up to this day the remarkably intact fossilized remains of several millions years old sea creatures, including of their belly's contents. But the fish was made to take him back to a specific location, regurgitate him after several days, and a type of vegetaion made to grow over him that he might recover from the ordeal and be protected. It was probably the sight of his miraculous return that deeply struck the people's hearts and made them understand God's loving mercy to all His creatures, that He would send His own prophet to the brink of death and back for the sake of avoiding an ungrateful nation's destruction.

    God makes sure his messengers are protected, assisted along with their followers, succesfull over the rejectors whether through the implementation of moral reforms or the destruction of a nation that continues to reject, and His communications correctly propagated 37:171-3,40:5,51 during the various phases of warning, augmented and pronounced warning, communicating the truth to the extent that no one is left with an excuse to deny it, migration and acquittal. Between each phase the messenger and his followers are told to wait for God's instructions as only He knows when each step has reached its term. In fact in 68:48 Muhammad is told to "wait with patience for the command of your Lord, and be not like the Companion of the Fish". This excellent institution of prophethood in spite of its accompanying clear evidence and miracle, is not able to eradicate the differences of people in belief and disbelief because this difference is caused by the people themselves 2:213. Such a difference cannot be removed by those arguments and evidence because it is not based on reason but on envy and rebellion. The fact remains that if Allah had so wished He could have prevented this difference 2:253,5:48,6:35,149,11:118 but He has established a system of cause and effect in the universe, endowed man with freewill, this resulted in differences among the people, some were resolved through the sending of prophets but not all as God doesnt compel mankind to follow a certain path, it depends on each person's will. As a result of these differences created by the people came conflicts, and fighting was ordained on the believers and their prophets in the way of Allah as a criterion of faith 8:37"so that Allah might separate the impure from the good”, 29:3“and most certainly Allah will know those who believe and most certainly He will know the hypocrites”.

    The Quran addresses the Arabs and tells them that the result of their rejection will be similar to the peoples of the Messengers of old such as Noah, Hud, Lot, Shuayb, Salih, Moses etc. The court of justice which will be set up for every person on the Day of Judgement was set up on a lower but nonetheless terryfing scale for these nations who rejected God's communications 69:1-12.
    The Quran reminds Muhammad and the believers of this reality and comforts them with the fact that this Law of God will never change because the rejecters are not denying the messenger, the individual; they are denying the Lord of the Universe 6:33-4"We know indeed that what they say certainly grieves you, but surely they do not call you a liar; but the unjust deny the communications of Allah. And certainly messengers before you were rejected, but they were patient on being rejected and persecuted until Our help came to them; and there is none to change the words of Allah, and certainly there has come to you some information about the messengers".

    As shown above, the philosophy of armed struggle/jihad is strictly confined to the prophetic era during which a previously warned nation is to be destroyed, as well as in the context of establishing the will of God on a specific land (Canaan in the times of Moses, Mecca in the times of Muhammad). Outside these 2 scenarios, the 3rd and last context to which armed jihad is applicable, is in self-defence.

    2:190-5 allowed retaliation for the first time against the polytheists of Mecca and explained the limits of defensive warfare because it now became inevitable that they should fight in self-defense or they would be destroyed: the believers are told to stand up to religious opression and persecution of their people 2:217,28:57,60:1,22:39-40"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah" even though war is something they disliked 2:216 and all members of the community feared due to the overwhelming superiority of their opponents 8:5-6,9:86-7. But they are fully justified in fighting back, and will be helped in the process 22:38"Surely Allah will defend those who believe; surely Allah does not love any one who is unfaithful, ungrateful". They are enjoined to fight only the people who attack them
    , showing that waging war in Allah's way isnt predicated on personal whims or desires, everywhere except near the Kaaba where fighting is conditional on an initial attack by their enemies because Muslims should not initiate proceedings to violate any thing which is sacred, and if the ennemy desists from deliberate aggression then fighting must stop. This in turn indicates, as other verses below will further stress, that there should be no rancor against the enemy when they correct themselves or even when they end the hostility.  
    Fighting must also stop in the sacred months during which it is considered 2:217"a grave matter" but "persecution is graver than slaughter" so Muslims were allowed to retaliate (this came as a relief to the muslim pilgrims afraid of performing their rites as they were attacked in the sacred months in the years of Hudaybiyah 6AH by the Meccans) according to the degree of aggression they are subject to, for inaction in that case would be suicidal "and they will not cease fighting with you until they turn you back from your religion".

    Besides uprooting the unworthy custodians of God's temple on account of their transgressions, the objective is to deliver the weak and powerless men, women and children among them from the unjust, ungodly physical and spiritual oppression 96:9-10,85:8-10"And they did not take vengeance on them for aught except that they believed in Allah, the Mighty, the Praised. Whose is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; and Allah is a Witness of all things. Surely (as for) those who persecute the believing men and the believing women, then do not repent, they shall have the chastisement of hell, and they shall have the chastisement of burning" 4:75"And what reason have you that you should not fight in the way of Allah and of the weak among the men and the women and the children, (of) those who say: Our Lord! cause us to go forth from this town, whose people are oppressors, and give us from Thee a guardian and give us from Thee a helper" 8:26"And remember when you were few oppressed in the land, fearing that the people may abduct you".

    "And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you" the root qaf-t-l means to kill. Its form is interractive in nature and suggests killing opposite killing or killing against killing. Its use in 9:123 for instance is most appropriate as it mentions those who are "near" the Muslims, in the sense that they constitute an imminent death threat, and thus the interractive qaatilu is used.
    To translate it as simply "kill" as some critics would like to, would therefore convey an unconditional injunction while the meaning and form of the Arabic verb do not allow it, let alone the Quranic rules of war that are solely restricted to fighting in self-defence. Literally speaking it should be rendered "engage in killing opposite killing" and because of a lack of non-Arabic word conveying that sense, the interractive word "fight" has been preferred and used by both Muslim and non Muslim translators, in all instances where the same form is used. Another example to illustrate the point is in 9:111, explaining what the consequence of qaatilu/"engage in killing opposite killing" entails; it either results in killing the opposite party, or being killed and that is because there is a clear will to kill from the opposite side. If qatilu simply meant "to murder", then the outcome would not necessarily entail being killed in the process. And finally, when the original order to qaatilu was issued in 2:190, it came with 2 important messages for those who are told to qaatilu:
    - do it against those who yuqaatilunakum
    - do not transgress the limits when applying the command to qaatilu

    What constitutes transgression in that context? To apply the command of qaatilu in a different way than prescribed in the verse, ie against people other than those who "yuqaatilunakum".
    This again, not only agrees with what was said about the verb being interractive in nature, as attested by its usage and the dictionaries stating that the word is used "in a context of a counter-effort to kill", but also with the Quran's overall message, which is to live at peace with anyone, Muslim or else, that does not agress the Muslims unjustly, and defend against those that engage in hostilities without any reason other than hatred for the religion.

    The 3rd type of jihad is therefore strictly limited to fighting in self-defence 4:75,8:26,3:167"fight in Allah's way, or defend yourselves", for the delivrance from spiritual and physical opression, while the oppressor is said to be fighting "in the way of the devil" 4:76.

    In this atmosphere of constant threat from inside and outside the city, the early Medinite Muslim communtiy would never lay down to sleep except with their weapons with them and had to be in constant preparation for attacks from all sides, by the pagans of all Arabia, and their allies among the people of the book 8:60"And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them, whom you do not know (but) Allah knows them". This is one of the features of defensive Jihad, military preparedness does not have the purpose of invading or aggressing unjustly, but is done to dissuade the potential enemy, known or hidden, or a least make him think twice before aggressing the Muslims. And in the case he decides to launch an assault, then the counter attack will not delay so as to imperil the community. This deterring method creates an atmosphere where diplomacy might be preferred than risking confrontation. However even in such an atmosphere, Muslims themselves should never beg for peace when they are in an state of inferiority. This is simple common sense from a military perspective, as it would expose a weak mindset to the enemy who would in turn be further emboldened in his belligerent attitude. Only in a state of superiority should they go and seek peace from the enemy in order to avoid further bloodshed. But should on the other hand the opposite party come with a peace offer then the believers are told to rely on Allah and "incline", ie be receptive to it 8:61"And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and trust in Allah; surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing", He will strenghten them as He did in the past in case their aggressors seek to deceive them 8:62.

    The believers are never once told to go forth to battle because of war booty and in fact the Quran says that only those who sell this world's material life for the hereafter are worthy of fighting in Allah's way for the defense of the helpless 4:74-5. This is particularly pictured through the oath sworn in 100:1-11 and the ungrateful use of resources and possessions for looting, causing chaos, bloodshed and corruption to spread in the earth. Neither is fighting for the propagation of Islam once mentionned in the whole of the Quran.
    48:18-19 relate events that have passed and how Allah tranquilized the hearts of the believers among those who swore allegiance to the prophet, rewarded them with a victory soon after as well as war booty which they acquired consequently to the battle.
    Then in 48:20 the Quran reminds of God's promise to the rest of the believers regarding war booty. It was His intent to give victory to the believers fighting in His way and reward them in this very world, consequently to their succesful passing of a trial 8:17"that He might test the believers by a good trial from Him". However the Quran repeatedly warns the believers that wordly gains are not the objective of Jihad 4:94"when you go to war in Allah's way, make investigation, and do not say to any one who offers you peace: You are not a believer. Do you seek goods of this world's life? But with Allah there are abundant gains". The believers can never go to war boastfully and for the sake of empty glory 8:47. The Quran relates in 8:5-8 how Allah tested the believers' motives in battle in order to purge them from their greed; if they would run after the booty or stand firm with the prophet to defend Islam. When the aqcuisition of slaves became restricted to battles after which they had to be freed either voluntarly or as a ransom, God warned the Muslims that during battle the motive must be the attainement of the military objectives before any consideration for war gains, and once the objective is fully accomplished, only then the taking of war prisonners and seasing of other spoils is allowed 47:4. In a later verse following the battle of Badr, God admonished those among the Muslims who had shown weakness in their general outlook on life, who had succombed to their greed and begun capturing soldiers while the battle was still raging and the enemy threat hadnt been entirely contained 8:67"you desire the frail goods of this world, while Allah desires (for you) the hereafter; and Allah is Mighty, Wise" but since God had permitted in 47:4 the ransoming of war prisonners, the wealth they had gathered through this mean was considered lawful 8:68-9"Were it not for an ordinance from Allah that had already gone forth, surely there would have befallen you a great chastisement for what you had taken to. Eat then of the lawful and good (things) which you have acquired in war, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".
    The believers are then strongly admonished in 3:152 for their attitude during the battle of Uhud and them becoming "weak-hearted" for having "desired this world" after Allah "had shown you that which you loved" ie the war booty whether physical (the prisonners they could then ransom) or material. This shows that going to battle with the unique motive of wordly gains is not considered noble in God's eyes.

    The Quran would therefore stir up the believers for battle based on the reality of their physical and spiritual opression, whether men, women, old and young alike 2:217,4:75,8:26,22:39-40,28:57,60:1,85:8-10,96:9-10 so they must overcome any fear and trust in that Allah's help will come at the battlfield and will weaken the struggle of the rejecters and opressers no mater the forces they can muster 4:84. Part of the 613 Jewish commandments is to similarily be fearless in battle and fully trust in God Deut3:22,7:21,20:3 and in fact the reason why the Jews were punished with a 40 years desert wandering prior to their entry into the land promised to their forefathers was because they had shown fear and mistrust in God's capacity to defeat, through a weak army, a much stronger adversary. Besides the wordly necessity of waging war in God's way, the Quran asssures those who fear death and the loss of this present world that it is a shallow reasoning since this world is ephemeral and the Hereafter awaiting the righteous believers, including those that went forth for a just war, is perduring 4:74. And although the believers are promised wordly gains as a result of their faith in God and His prophet, as a result of their personal sacrifices for the sake of their cause against all odds, the Quran stresses that these wordly gains must never be the true motive.

    Just as obeying a divine injuction to fight in Allah's way results in being rewarded in this world as well as the next 48:18-21, turning one's back to the enemy and refusing to fight in Allah's way makes a person 48:16,8:16"deserving of Allah's wrath" in this world as well as the next, as stated in the Hebrew Bible in Jer48:10"A curse on anyone who is lax in doing the Lord’s work! A curse on anyone who keeps their sword from bloodshed". As already said above, history bares testimony to this fact with the example of the Israelites who had refused to put their trust in the prophet Musa to go forth and fight in Allah's way. Their wordly reward was consequently taken away and they were forbidden entry into the blessed land and sent to wander 40 years in the desert until the last one of those who had shown cowardice was dead and a new generation raised instead that would willingly take up arms, fight and conquer as divinely ordained. See the Quran in 2:243,5:21-26 as well as the Hebrew Bible in Numbers13:28-33,14:1-35,21:14-35,26:64-65 and Deut2:7,14-19,Josh5:6.
    The Muslims are warned that the same fate awaits those who turn their backs to the prophet when they are called to struggle in Allah's way 9:38-39"If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things". The Believers should rejoice at the opportunity of serving God's cause but what God wishes to accomplish isnt really dependent on them for He could easily uproot them in case of disobedience and rise another people instead. However, those who followed the prophet Muhammad in times of peace and war are the opposite example. Contrary to the majority of Israelites in Moses' time who refused to march forth despite witnessing all kinds of divine miracles, the majority of Muhammad's followers fought when ordered to. Because of all their sacrifices and because they went forth when they were commanded to, they were made successors in the land 6:133-134 and they earned Allah's rewards in this world as well as, God wills, in the next.
    In addition, the Muslims are commanded not to neglect the obligatory prayers, even when facing the enemy at the battlefield 4:101-3. This shows the true objective of these warriors fighting to free themselves and their people from religious bondage; fighting was not their primary occupation for when the time of holding the timed and ordained communion with their Lord arrived, they performed their spiritual obligations despite the imminent danger.

    For all the above mentionned noble reasons, the oppressed believers are urged and compelled, despite the natural fear of having to confront a superior enemy, to stand for war 2:216,8:65 if they are fit physically, mentally and financially 9:91,48:17 against all aggressors outside the fold of Islam 9:29 while relying on Allah; He knows their material and physical weakness and will assist them 8:66.

    Jihad, in all of its aspects, whether for the establishment of God's will in a specific land, the punishment of rejecters in the prophetic era, or the timeless right to self defence, is limited to the principle of "and do not exceed the limit. Verily, Allah loves not those who exceed the limit". Self defence, especially in the face of spiritual opression, is a divinely sanctionned right 22:39"Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them" 60:1,22:40"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah".

    The limits in reprisals are also: fighting someone before engaging in peaceful negotiations 8:39-40, in a dominant position the Muslims must remain concious of their past weakness before Allah strenghtened them and not refuse the hand of peace from non-muslims 4:94, or starting a war, or killing women and children, the retaliation must be 22:60"with the like of that with which he has been afflicted and he has been oppressed". 2:194"Thus, if anyone commits aggression against you, attack him just as he has attacked you - but remain conscious of God" and the door to patience and total pardon in lieu of a retaliation when one has taken the upper hand is still open to those who have reached a higher spiritual level, restraining themselves and forgiving for the sake of Allah and in the way of Allah 42:39-43,16:126-8"but if you are patient, it will certainly be best for those who are patient..Surely Allah is with those who guard (against evil) and those who do good (to others)".
    The sensitivity of the issue is pictured in God's address to David, the prophet-king 34:10-11. As he was given mastery over a crucial component in warfare -iron-, he and all those after him are told that in their use of that martial technology, God is ever seeing of what they do, indicating that they should use this means in the path of righteous deed, not in the way of oppression, cruelty, and sin.

    8:39,2:193"And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors" the verse and its wider context are speaking of religious persecution. It is the right and duty of every Muslim to defend himself against that persecution causing him fear or preventing him completely from practicing his religion, or even compromising some of it to please the oppressor.
    "and all the religion is for Allah" explains why religious persecution must be fought; by THE religion (singular, pointed with a definite article ie Islam) should be entirely for Allah, what is meant is there cannot be any forceful compromise between this way (Islam) and any other way or form of worship out of fear. Muslims should be able to worship freely and without any fear just as the followers of previous revelations had the right to worship safely and without any compulsion which is why it is said in 22:40 that throughout the ages Allah repelled some men by means of others to keep safe synagogues, churches and cloisters 2:251"And were it not for Allah's repelling some men with others, the earth would certainly be in a state of disorder; but Allah is Gracious to the creatures".
    The end of the verse 2:193 re-stresses against whom fighting must be exclusively directed, showing that the aim is not to erase all other forms of worship, but only to stop fitna/religious persecution "but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors". (see 10:83,16:110,85:10 for fitna).
    If they desist from persecution, the Muslims are at once to stop fighting against them, and hostilities are not to be continued against any except the aggressors. The interpretation that these words mean that fighting is to be continued until all people accept Islam, is therefore belied, not only by the clear wording of the verse itself, but by the rest of the Quran speaking of peaceful coexistance regardless of faith so long as no hostility is initiated against the Muslims, and also belied but by history itself. The forceful, worldwide dominion of one religion above all others in this life isnt a Quranic concept, but a Biblical one that will occur in the Messianic Age. See Zech14 for example among messianic passages, relating how "utopian" the world will become once all other religions, along with those that keep practicing them despite the warnings, are wiped out and only the Jewish God is worshiped. This is not to mention that among the 613 commandements revealed at Sinai are the laws concerning the erradication of specific nations, and these are still binding upon the Jews up to this day due to their failure in executing these laws fully in the past Deut20:16,17,25:19.

    For example in 9:4, the Muslims are told to leave the Idolators who do not break their aggreements, do not fight them or incite others. 8:38 further states that "if they desist, that which is past shall be forgiven to them; and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed". The "desisting" and the "returning" refer to the struggle of the disbelievers against the Muslims. They are urged to stop the fitna lest they be destroyed when their appointed time of respite expires 15:5 like the past nations of vehement rejectors to whom God's messengers were sent 33:60-2"If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease and the agitators in the city do not desist, We shall most certainly set you over them, then they shall not be your neighbors in it but for a little while. Cursed: wherever they are found they shall be seized and murdered, a (horrible) murdering. (Such has been) the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah".

    There is no coercion in religion because truth is made plain through the revelation 2:256,18:29 it becomes self evident against falsehood and thus must naturally prevail over any form of worship that is not the surrender to Allah 3:19,9:33,34:46-47,48:28,61:9. This is according to a universal system established upon Truth, and where falsehood is therefore bound to vanish 15:85,17:81,21:16-8. This prophecy which the prophet saw the fulfillement in his lifetime on the land of Arabia, is particularly made clear in 48:27-8 and does not signify that other religions would at any time entirely disappear. It only indicates that the superiority of the religion of Islam over all other religions will at last be established, and Islam will be the religion of the majority of the nations of the earth. Although it initially addresses a specific nation 6:92,42:7 since the one charged to deliver it was from that particular location, the Quran, because of its pristine nature in relation to the original monotheism and to all of humanity's innate disposition, as well as its universal, timeless relevancy, was meant as mercy to the entire world 62:3"and [to cause this message to spread] from them unto other people as soon as they come into contact with them".
     
    It is the natural right of all Muslims and every human being to 26:227"defend themselves after they are oppressed". The divinely sanctionned right, throughout the ages and nations, of jihad in self defense has a clear objective which is not to gain territorial expansion but to dispel mischief, and corruption/fasad on the earth and stop religious oppression 2:251,22:40. Even though the object of the enemies of Islam when they take on arms and engage Muslims in war is to exterminate them entirely, the Muslims are told that the Divine object in assisting the believers in punishing the disbelievers at war is not to exterminate them, but to deliver a blow that would deter them from continuous agression 3:127.
    Those among non-Muslims against whom self-defensive jihad cannot be directed are those 60:8"who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes..show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice" or those who come in peace without any desire to fight 4:90 and this is because not all non-muslims are alike, and even among the ennemies of Islam some do not strive actively for the extermination of Muslims, they could be influenced by their comunity 60:7"It may be that Allah will bring about friendship between you and those whom you hold to be your enemies among them; and Allah is Powerful; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".

    Many verses, in addition to the ones previously mentionned, and passages lay out the limits of reprisal when one is exercizing his right to self-defence. That aspect of Jihad cannot be directed are those 60:8"who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes..show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice" or those who come in peace without any desire to fight 4:90 and this is because not all of Islam's opponents are alike, some do not strive actively for the extermination of Muslims and should therefore not be fought in the same way as one would engage an armed enemy. They, as well as others could be influenced by their comunity and so the benefit of the doubt is on their side 60:7"It may be that Allah will bring about friendship between you and those whom you hold to be your enemies among them; and Allah is Powerful; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".
    Those upon whom the law of armed self-defense is ordained are 60:9"those who made war upon you on account of (your) religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up (others) in your expulsion". In situations of opression and the infliction of evil on them, the believers must retain their composure and live up to their level of faith and God-consciousness
    by keeping in mind the higher realities. Although they will be in no way blamable for retaliating and defending themselves with the same level of evil they have suffered, they should prefer magnanimity whenever pardoning can be conducing to reconcilement and possible reforming of the evil doer.  And since in that case it necessarily involves the selfless act of
    supressing of one's own feelings for the sake of a higher truth, Allah reassures the person that the corresponding reward is well kept with Him and the Quran concludes once again by upholding and praising the virtues of patience and forgiveness in adversity, as well as recognizing the great resolve such an attitude requires 2:177,42:37-43.

    The Prophet's conflict with his tribe was not because of any worldly reason; it was only for the freedom to practice the religion of God 4:74,94 in the place originally dedicated for it.
    He wanted the leaders of the Quraysh to fulfill their obligations towards the House of God because they were its custodians. If they were not ready for this, then they had no right to keep it in their custody nor did they have any right to stop people through persecution from embracing the religion of God or practicing their worship on a land settled for the universal worship of the One God since the days of Ibrahim 22:25-9. This was Allah's way before in regards to a land declared sacred but whose purpose was perverted and progressively abandonned by a people who despite knowing God, had perverted His ways Gen15:16,Deut9,1Sam4:7. They would intimidate any convert to Islam or anyone willing to embrace it. It was to eliminate this fitna that the Prophet was ordered to dislodge the Quraysh from Mecca. And when he did so as prophecied publicly as a matter of warning at the very beginning of his prophetic call, people hastened to accept Islam in multitudes now that they were suddenly afforded with the liberty to choose their own religion, in total freedom from the shackles of the Quraysh. 110:2 predicted this reality long before the conquest of Mecca "And you see men embrace the religion of God in multitudes", and this was through the guidance of the Heavenly Book that transcended all obstacles to give life to the spiritually dead 6:122.

  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #505 - July 27, 2018, 12:38 PM

    Gaston   stop creating GAS CHAMBERS OUT OF CEMB FOLDER
    Someone asked

    Yes, when they directly or indirectly harm/kill those that have not been actively engaged in opressing and harming them. Their Israeli enemy, although using different methods, is just as guilty of terrorism as them, when they equally harm and kill, directly or indirectly, those that have not been actively engaged in opressing and harming them.

    Now as to the wider issue of physical struggle/jihad, we have to analyze the context of its use in the times of the last prophet and before.

    It is the unalterable law of God that when He sends a messenger in a people, these particular people are left with no option, but to hearken His warnings and calls during an interval of time whose expiry can not be hastened nor delayed except by Allah 15:5,16:61,53:58. Allah states about this period that His messengers show the community, starting from the leaders in mischief greatly responsible for the general moral degradation of their people down to the poorest and most insignificant elements of the community 17:16,73:11 the signs of the truth in the heavens and earth, as well as in their own deepest selves 41:53,51:27 to the point that the people must recognize it and mend their evil ways.

    They are seized with affliction or tried with a sign from God when they reject the messenger 11:52-60,64-68 sent to them in order to humble themselves and mend their ways 7:94. They are urged to reason and ask for God's forgiveness lest the fate of past sinful nations each greater than other in might 43:8, to whom God's messengers were sent with the bayinat ie the undeniable evidence and signs befalls them, and they are uprooted by a grasp so encompassing and violent that it is pictured as beginning from their foundations (the area one would naturally be inclined to seek shelter in during a calamity) up 16:26,40:22,18:55,22:42-8"And if they reject you, then already before you did the people of Nuh and Ad and Samood reject (prophets). And the people of Ibrahim and the people of Lut, As well as those of Madyan and Musa (too) was rejected, but I gave respite to the unbelievers, then did I overtake them, so how (severe) was My disapproval. So how many a town did We destroy while it was unjust, so it was fallen down upon its roofs, and (how many a) deserted well and palace raised high. Have they not travelled in the land so that they should have hearts with which to understand, or ears with which to hear? For surely it is not the eyes that are blind, but blind are the hearts which are in the breasts. And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and Allah will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you number. And how many a town to which I gave respite while it was unjust, then I overtook it, and to Me is the return".

    Mankind is continuously encouraged to research and analyse the history of past nations, unavoidably seeing in it the divine pattern. Being the only extensive evidential base for the contemplation and analysis of how societies function, history then leads to moral reform, providing a backround for one to test his own moral sense against that of individuals and societies of the past when faced with similar complex situations. The past causes the present, and so the future.

    This shows that even in this life, the Creator's relationship with man is not merely based on the physical law, as with other creatures devoid of moral accountability and freewill but the moral law also is working side by side with it. The application of the moral law consequently to the humans' moral acts itself points to the truth that a time must come in this kingdom when on the completion of man's role in the physical world full results of his moral acts should also appear strictly in accordance with the moral law because in the physical world they do not appear fully.
     
    Some of these nations completely mend their ways during their time of respite and prior to their annihilation by Divine affliction, as happenned in the prophet Jonas' lifetime during which they all believed 10:98"When they believed, We removed from them the chastisement of disgrace in this world's life and We gave them provision till a time". If they dont and in addition try uprooting or killing the messengers sent to them with the undeniable bayinat, continuously oppose them and conspire against them to prevent the establishement of the way of God 42:13 then those who are finally and definately pointed as the guilty ones by the prophets 44:22 in these nations will incure Divine affliction through several means ranging from being put to the sword by the believers themselves as in Moses and Muhammad's time, to complete annihilation by natural cataclysms, to the sending of a powerful ennemy to bring destruction as happened to Jesus' nation, or the subjugation of the rejecters to the followers of the messengers for generations to come. Concerning this reality, the Psalmist states Ps46:9"Go and see the works of the Lord, that He has wrought devastation in the earth".

    As regards the first option, the Quran retells the stories of past nations who were ordained, against a mightier ennemy and with God's help, to uproot unrighteousness and establish the will of God in a specific land. Such was the case with the Israelites back in the times of Moses who were commanded to cleanse the blessed land of Canaan from its unrighteous dwellers, to Saul/Talut and David 2:246-252, down to the Ishmaelites and the cleansing of the ancient temple of monotheism in Mecca by Muhammad from its unworthy guardians who had swayed into the ways of polytheism and prevented the re-establishement of the original way of Ibrahim 22:40-1"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. And had there not been Allah's repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah´s name is much remembered; and surely Allah will help him who helps His cause; most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty. Those who, should We establish them in the land, will keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and enjoin good and forbid evil; and Allah´s is the end of affairs".

    So just like it was ordained to Muhammad and the Children of Ishmael, Allah previously ordered in the days of Moses and the prophets of the children of Israel to fight in His way for specific purposes Deut1:41,Deut7,9:4-6,12:1-3,20:16-18 and allthroughout Deuteronomy where the Israelites are commanded to cleanse the land from idolatry, and later on through the succeeding prophets that were similarly ordered to transmit God's will of purging evil from the land, by the sword without holding back whether it involves killing Jews or non Jews as prophecised in Isa1:25, and whether the ones doing the task are Jews or not as stated in Jer48:10 concerning the Chaldeans sent to destroy the Moabites "Cursed be he who performs the Lord's work deceitfully, and cursed be he who withholds his sword from blood" or the Assyrians of Sennacherib raised by God and through whom He destroyed, exiled and enslaved the Kingdom of Israel Amos6:11-14 or the Babylonians of Nebuchadnezzar whom God calls His servant for being the performer of His will, sent firstly to inflict massacre upon the Israelites for their repeated transgressions, and then upon those Ammonites and Edomites that occupied the holy lands and reintroduced idolatry Jer25:9,49:19. Later on it would be the non-Jew Cyrus, king of Persia who would be divinely aroused and commanded to wage war against the Babylonians until their defeat, expulsion from the holy land and the return of the Jews to Israel Jer50:14-21,51:1,53.  

    In the case of the prophet Muhammad it was prophecied that the unrighteous ones perpetuating the spiritual corruption of the sacred land in which God's will was to be re-established, will try exiling him and his followers so consequently they will be ultimately uprooted from the land they had complete dominion over 17:76-7.

    Besides the people of Jonas/Yunus practically all nations to whom messengers were sent with such warnings faced the punishment of death and sometimes complete annihilation as described for the messengers of old throughout sura 7 and 11,26,29,40:5,14:13-15,58:5"Surely those who act in opposition to Allah and His Messenger shall be laid down prostrate as those before them were laid down prostrate; and indeed We have revealed clear communications, and the unbelievers shall have an abasing chastisement" 26:208-9"And We did not destroy any town but it had (its) warners, To remind, and We are never unjust". This divine scourge does not befall the sinful nation so long as all the righteous and the prophets have fled the land 4:165,8:33,11:58,12:110,17:15,19:46-50,20:77,28:59.

    God does not directly interact with the people, he in the first instance sends Messengers to a nation, human or else, to whom the people are given time to present all their objections and make up their minds. During this time the messengers and their followers have to show patience and perseverance in the face of all persecution and do their utmost with God's guidance to make good and bad, truth and falsehood perfectly clear 17:15"..nor do We chastise until We raise a messenger" 8:33"nor is Allah going to chastise them while yet they ask for forgiveness". The Messengers are a means of communicating the truth of God in such an ultimate form to their addressees that they are left with no legitimate excuse to deny it, especially considering the perseverance of their prophets with the hope of bringing them back from their spiritual degeneration 46:27. If their efforts are unable to influence them, then it only means that nothing can change and reform them. The messengers therefore remove all excuses the rejecters might have on the Day of Resurrection 20:134"And had We destroyed them with chastisement before this, they would certainly have said: O our Lord! why didst Thou not send to us a messenger, for then we should have followed Thy communications before that we met disgrace and shame" and any excuse they might have for the just punishement they will imminently face in this world for their rejection 21:109"But if they turn back, say: I have given you warning in fairness and I do not know whether what you are threatened with is near or far". This particular point of warning the nation to an extent that its continuous rejection becomes inexcusable before the sending of the divine scourge, is demonstrated through the story of the prophet Jonas/Yunus who left his people/qawm in wrath thinking the time of the divine chastisement had come due to their refusal to hearken his repeated calls and was stopped in his journey by God Himself who mercifully returned him to his people whose time of respite hadnt expired and who ultimately all ended up believing in him before the sending of the scourge 10:98,21:87-8,37:139-148. The manner in which he was brought back to his people was nothing short of miraculous, a display of God's favor to the righteous and pious as well as a demonstration that God's mercy and forgiveness are open to all so long as their time of respite hasnt come to an end. After he was designated as the one to be thrown to the sea by the boat's crew members, he was swallowed by a sea creature, and would have tarried in it till the day of resurrection in the way we see up to this day the remarkably intact fossilized remains of several millions years old sea creatures, including of their belly's contents. But the fish was made to take him back to a specific location, regurgitate him after several days, and a type of vegetaion made to grow over him that he might recover from the ordeal and be protected. It was probably the sight of his miraculous return that deeply struck the people's hearts and made them understand God's loving mercy to all His creatures, that He would send His own prophet to the brink of death and back for the sake of avoiding an ungrateful nation's destruction.

    God makes sure his messengers are protected, assisted along with their followers, succesfull over the rejectors whether through the implementation of moral reforms or the destruction of a nation that continues to reject, and His communications correctly propagated 37:171-3,40:5,51 during the various phases of warning, augmented and pronounced warning, communicating the truth to the extent that no one is left with an excuse to deny it, migration and acquittal. Between each phase the messenger and his followers are told to wait for God's instructions as only He knows when each step has reached its term. In fact in 68:48 Muhammad is told to "wait with patience for the command of your Lord, and be not like the Companion of the Fish". This excellent institution of prophethood in spite of its accompanying clear evidence and miracle, is not able to eradicate the differences of people in belief and disbelief because this difference is caused by the people themselves 2:213. Such a difference cannot be removed by those arguments and evidence because it is not based on reason but on envy and rebellion. The fact remains that if Allah had so wished He could have prevented this difference 2:253,5:48,6:35,149,11:118 but He has established a system of cause and effect in the universe, endowed man with freewill, this resulted in differences among the people, some were resolved through the sending of prophets but not all as God doesnt compel mankind to follow a certain path, it depends on each person's will. As a result of these differences created by the people came conflicts, and fighting was ordained on the believers and their prophets in the way of Allah as a criterion of faith 8:37"so that Allah might separate the impure from the good”, 29:3“and most certainly Allah will know those who believe and most certainly He will know the hypocrites”.

    The Quran addresses the Arabs and tells them that the result of their rejection will be similar to the peoples of the Messengers of old such as Noah, Hud, Lot, Shuayb, Salih, Moses etc. The court of justice which will be set up for every person on the Day of Judgement was set up on a lower but nonetheless terryfing scale for these nations who rejected God's communications 69:1-12.
    The Quran reminds Muhammad and the believers of this reality and comforts them with the fact that this Law of God will never change because the rejecters are not denying the messenger, the individual; they are denying the Lord of the Universe 6:33-4"We know indeed that what they say certainly grieves you, but surely they do not call you a liar; but the unjust deny the communications of Allah. And certainly messengers before you were rejected, but they were patient on being rejected and persecuted until Our help came to them; and there is none to change the words of Allah, and certainly there has come to you some information about the messengers".

    As shown above, the philosophy of armed struggle/jihad is strictly confined to the prophetic era during which a previously warned nation is to be destroyed, as well as in the context of establishing the will of God on a specific land (Canaan in the times of Moses, Mecca in the times of Muhammad). Outside these 2 scenarios, the 3rd and last context to which armed jihad is applicable, is in self-defence.

    2:190-5 allowed retaliation for the first time against the polytheists of Mecca and explained the limits of defensive warfare because it now became inevitable that they should fight in self-defense or they would be destroyed: the believers are told to stand up to religious opression and persecution of their people 2:217,28:57,60:1,22:39-40"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah" even though war is something they disliked 2:216 and all members of the community feared due to the overwhelming superiority of their opponents 8:5-6,9:86-7. But they are fully justified in fighting back, and will be helped in the process 22:38"Surely Allah will defend those who believe; surely Allah does not love any one who is unfaithful, ungrateful". They are enjoined to fight only the people who attack them
    , showing that waging war in Allah's way isnt predicated on personal whims or desires, everywhere except near the Kaaba where fighting is conditional on an initial attack by their enemies because Muslims should not initiate proceedings to violate any thing which is sacred, and if the ennemy desists from deliberate aggression then fighting must stop. This in turn indicates, as other verses below will further stress, that there should be no rancor against the enemy when they correct themselves or even when they end the hostility.  
    Fighting must also stop in the sacred months during which it is considered 2:217"a grave matter" but "persecution is graver than slaughter" so Muslims were allowed to retaliate (this came as a relief to the muslim pilgrims afraid of performing their rites as they were attacked in the sacred months in the years of Hudaybiyah 6AH by the Meccans) according to the degree of aggression they are subject to, for inaction in that case would be suicidal "and they will not cease fighting with you until they turn you back from your religion".

    Besides uprooting the unworthy custodians of God's temple on account of their transgressions, the objective is to deliver the weak and powerless men, women and children among them from the unjust, ungodly physical and spiritual oppression 96:9-10,85:8-10"And they did not take vengeance on them for aught except that they believed in Allah, the Mighty, the Praised. Whose is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; and Allah is a Witness of all things. Surely (as for) those who persecute the believing men and the believing women, then do not repent, they shall have the chastisement of hell, and they shall have the chastisement of burning" 4:75"And what reason have you that you should not fight in the way of Allah and of the weak among the men and the women and the children, (of) those who say: Our Lord! cause us to go forth from this town, whose people are oppressors, and give us from Thee a guardian and give us from Thee a helper" 8:26"And remember when you were few oppressed in the land, fearing that the people may abduct you".

    "And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you" the root qaf-t-l means to kill. Its form is interractive in nature and suggests killing opposite killing or killing against killing. Its use in 9:123 for instance is most appropriate as it mentions those who are "near" the Muslims, in the sense that they constitute an imminent death threat, and thus the interractive qaatilu is used.
    To translate it as simply "kill" as some critics would like to, would therefore convey an unconditional injunction while the meaning and form of the Arabic verb do not allow it, let alone the Quranic rules of war that are solely restricted to fighting in self-defence. Literally speaking it should be rendered "engage in killing opposite killing" and because of a lack of non-Arabic word conveying that sense, the interractive word "fight" has been preferred and used by both Muslim and non Muslim translators, in all instances where the same form is used. Another example to illustrate the point is in 9:111, explaining what the consequence of qaatilu/"engage in killing opposite killing" entails; it either results in killing the opposite party, or being killed and that is because there is a clear will to kill from the opposite side. If qatilu simply meant "to murder", then the outcome would not necessarily entail being killed in the process. And finally, when the original order to qaatilu was issued in 2:190, it came with 2 important messages for those who are told to qaatilu:
    - do it against those who yuqaatilunakum
    - do not transgress the limits when applying the command to qaatilu

    What constitutes transgression in that context? To apply the command of qaatilu in a different way than prescribed in the verse, ie against people other than those who "yuqaatilunakum".
    This again, not only agrees with what was said about the verb being interractive in nature, as attested by its usage and the dictionaries stating that the word is used "in a context of a counter-effort to kill", but also with the Quran's overall message, which is to live at peace with anyone, Muslim or else, that does not agress the Muslims unjustly, and defend against those that engage in hostilities without any reason other than hatred for the religion.

    The 3rd type of jihad is therefore strictly limited to fighting in self-defence 4:75,8:26,3:167"fight in Allah's way, or defend yourselves", for the delivrance from spiritual and physical opression, while the oppressor is said to be fighting "in the way of the devil" 4:76.

    In this atmosphere of constant threat from inside and outside the city, the early Medinite Muslim communtiy would never lay down to sleep except with their weapons with them and had to be in constant preparation for attacks from all sides, by the pagans of all Arabia, and their allies among the people of the book 8:60"And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them, whom you do not know (but) Allah knows them". This is one of the features of defensive Jihad, military preparedness does not have the purpose of invading or aggressing unjustly, but is done to dissuade the potential enemy, known or hidden, or a least make him think twice before aggressing the Muslims. And in the case he decides to launch an assault, then the counter attack will not delay so as to imperil the community. This deterring method creates an atmosphere where diplomacy might be preferred than risking confrontation. However even in such an atmosphere, Muslims themselves should never beg for peace when they are in an state of inferiority. This is simple common sense from a military perspective, as it would expose a weak mindset to the enemy who would in turn be further emboldened in his belligerent attitude. Only in a state of superiority should they go and seek peace from the enemy in order to avoid further bloodshed. But should on the other hand the opposite party come with a peace offer then the believers are told to rely on Allah and "incline", ie be receptive to it 8:61"And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and trust in Allah; surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing", He will strenghten them as He did in the past in case their aggressors seek to deceive them 8:62.

    The believers are never once told to go forth to battle because of war booty and in fact the Quran says that only those who sell this world's material life for the hereafter are worthy of fighting in Allah's way for the defense of the helpless 4:74-5. This is particularly pictured through the oath sworn in 100:1-11 and the ungrateful use of resources and possessions for looting, causing chaos, bloodshed and corruption to spread in the earth. Neither is fighting for the propagation of Islam once mentionned in the whole of the Quran.
    48:18-19 relate events that have passed and how Allah tranquilized the hearts of the believers among those who swore allegiance to the prophet, rewarded them with a victory soon after as well as war booty which they acquired consequently to the battle.
    Then in 48:20 the Quran reminds of God's promise to the rest of the believers regarding war booty. It was His intent to give victory to the believers fighting in His way and reward them in this very world, consequently to their succesful passing of a trial 8:17"that He might test the believers by a good trial from Him". However the Quran repeatedly warns the believers that wordly gains are not the objective of Jihad 4:94"when you go to war in Allah's way, make investigation, and do not say to any one who offers you peace: You are not a believer. Do you seek goods of this world's life? But with Allah there are abundant gains". The believers can never go to war boastfully and for the sake of empty glory 8:47. The Quran relates in 8:5-8 how Allah tested the believers' motives in battle in order to purge them from their greed; if they would run after the booty or stand firm with the prophet to defend Islam. When the aqcuisition of slaves became restricted to battles after which they had to be freed either voluntarly or as a ransom, God warned the Muslims that during battle the motive must be the attainement of the military objectives before any consideration for war gains, and once the objective is fully accomplished, only then the taking of war prisonners and seasing of other spoils is allowed 47:4. In a later verse following the battle of Badr, God admonished those among the Muslims who had shown weakness in their general outlook on life, who had succombed to their greed and begun capturing soldiers while the battle was still raging and the enemy threat hadnt been entirely contained 8:67"you desire the frail goods of this world, while Allah desires (for you) the hereafter; and Allah is Mighty, Wise" but since God had permitted in 47:4 the ransoming of war prisonners, the wealth they had gathered through this mean was considered lawful 8:68-9"Were it not for an ordinance from Allah that had already gone forth, surely there would have befallen you a great chastisement for what you had taken to. Eat then of the lawful and good (things) which you have acquired in war, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".
    The believers are then strongly admonished in 3:152 for their attitude during the battle of Uhud and them becoming "weak-hearted" for having "desired this world" after Allah "had shown you that which you loved" ie the war booty whether physical (the prisonners they could then ransom) or material. This shows that going to battle with the unique motive of wordly gains is not considered noble in God's eyes.

    The Quran would therefore stir up the believers for battle based on the reality of their physical and spiritual opression, whether men, women, old and young alike 2:217,4:75,8:26,22:39-40,28:57,60:1,85:8-10,96:9-10 so they must overcome any fear and trust in that Allah's help will come at the battlfield and will weaken the struggle of the rejecters and opressers no mater the forces they can muster 4:84. Part of the 613 Jewish commandments is to similarily be fearless in battle and fully trust in God Deut3:22,7:21,20:3 and in fact the reason why the Jews were punished with a 40 years desert wandering prior to their entry into the land promised to their forefathers was because they had shown fear and mistrust in God's capacity to defeat, through a weak army, a much stronger adversary. Besides the wordly necessity of waging war in God's way, the Quran asssures those who fear death and the loss of this present world that it is a shallow reasoning since this world is ephemeral and the Hereafter awaiting the righteous believers, including those that went forth for a just war, is perduring 4:74. And although the believers are promised wordly gains as a result of their faith in God and His prophet, as a result of their personal sacrifices for the sake of their cause against all odds, the Quran stresses that these wordly gains must never be the true motive.

    Just as obeying a divine injuction to fight in Allah's way results in being rewarded in this world as well as the next 48:18-21, turning one's back to the enemy and refusing to fight in Allah's way makes a person 48:16,8:16"deserving of Allah's wrath" in this world as well as the next, as stated in the Hebrew Bible in Jer48:10"A curse on anyone who is lax in doing the Lord’s work! A curse on anyone who keeps their sword from bloodshed". As already said above, history bares testimony to this fact with the example of the Israelites who had refused to put their trust in the prophet Musa to go forth and fight in Allah's way. Their wordly reward was consequently taken away and they were forbidden entry into the blessed land and sent to wander 40 years in the desert until the last one of those who had shown cowardice was dead and a new generation raised instead that would willingly take up arms, fight and conquer as divinely ordained. See the Quran in 2:243,5:21-26 as well as the Hebrew Bible in Numbers13:28-33,14:1-35,21:14-35,26:64-65 and Deut2:7,14-19,Josh5:6.
    The Muslims are warned that the same fate awaits those who turn their backs to the prophet when they are called to struggle in Allah's way 9:38-39"If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things". The Believers should rejoice at the opportunity of serving God's cause but what God wishes to accomplish isnt really dependent on them for He could easily uproot them in case of disobedience and rise another people instead. However, those who followed the prophet Muhammad in times of peace and war are the opposite example. Contrary to the majority of Israelites in Moses' time who refused to march forth despite witnessing all kinds of divine miracles, the majority of Muhammad's followers fought when ordered to. Because of all their sacrifices and because they went forth when they were commanded to, they were made successors in the land 6:133-134 and they earned Allah's rewards in this world as well as, God wills, in the next.
    In addition, the Muslims are commanded not to neglect the obligatory prayers, even when facing the enemy at the battlefield 4:101-3. This shows the true objective of these warriors fighting to free themselves and their people from religious bondage; fighting was not their primary occupation for when the time of holding the timed and ordained communion with their Lord arrived, they performed their spiritual obligations despite the imminent danger.

    For all the above mentionned noble reasons, the oppressed believers are urged and compelled, despite the natural fear of having to confront a superior enemy, to stand for war 2:216,8:65 if they are fit physically, mentally and financially 9:91,48:17 against all aggressors outside the fold of Islam 9:29 while relying on Allah; He knows their material and physical weakness and will assist them 8:66.

    Jihad, in all of its aspects, whether for the establishment of God's will in a specific land, the punishment of rejecters in the prophetic era, or the timeless right to self defence, is limited to the principle of "and do not exceed the limit. Verily, Allah loves not those who exceed the limit". Self defence, especially in the face of spiritual opression, is a divinely sanctionned right 22:39"Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them" 60:1,22:40"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah".

    The limits in reprisals are also: fighting someone before engaging in peaceful negotiations 8:39-40, in a dominant position the Muslims must remain concious of their past weakness before Allah strenghtened them and not refuse the hand of peace from non-muslims 4:94, or starting a war, or killing women and children, the retaliation must be 22:60"with the like of that with which he has been afflicted and he has been oppressed". 2:194"Thus, if anyone commits aggression against you, attack him just as he has attacked you - but remain conscious of God" and the door to patience and total pardon in lieu of a retaliation when one has taken the upper hand is still open to those who have reached a higher spiritual level, restraining themselves and forgiving for the sake of Allah and in the way of Allah 42:39-43,16:126-8"but if you are patient, it will certainly be best for those who are patient..Surely Allah is with those who guard (against evil) and those who do good (to others)".
    The sensitivity of the issue is pictured in God's address to David, the prophet-king 34:10-11. As he was given mastery over a crucial component in warfare -iron-, he and all those after him are told that in their use of that martial technology, God is ever seeing of what they do, indicating that they should use this means in the path of righteous deed, not in the way of oppression, cruelty, and sin.

    8:39,2:193"And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors" the verse and its wider context are speaking of religious persecution. It is the right and duty of every Muslim to defend himself against that persecution causing him fear or preventing him completely from practicing his religion, or even compromising some of it to please the oppressor.
    "and all the religion is for Allah" explains why religious persecution must be fought; by THE religion (singular, pointed with a definite article ie Islam) should be entirely for Allah, what is meant is there cannot be any forceful compromise between this way (Islam) and any other way or form of worship out of fear. Muslims should be able to worship freely and without any fear just as the followers of previous revelations had the right to worship safely and without any compulsion which is why it is said in 22:40 that throughout the ages Allah repelled some men by means of others to keep safe synagogues, churches and cloisters 2:251"And were it not for Allah's repelling some men with others, the earth would certainly be in a state of disorder; but Allah is Gracious to the creatures".
    The end of the verse 2:193 re-stresses against whom fighting must be exclusively directed, showing that the aim is not to erase all other forms of worship, but only to stop fitna/religious persecution "but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors". (see 10:83,16:110,85:10 for fitna).
    If they desist from persecution, the Muslims are at once to stop fighting against them, and hostilities are not to be continued against any except the aggressors. The interpretation that these words mean that fighting is to be continued until all people accept Islam, is therefore belied, not only by the clear wording of the verse itself, but by the rest of the Quran speaking of peaceful coexistance regardless of faith so long as no hostility is initiated against the Muslims, and also belied but by history itself. The forceful, worldwide dominion of one religion above all others in this life isnt a Quranic concept, but a Biblical one that will occur in the Messianic Age. See Zech14 for example among messianic passages, relating how "utopian" the world will become once all other religions, along with those that keep practicing them despite the warnings, are wiped out and only the Jewish God is worshiped. This is not to mention that among the 613 commandements revealed at Sinai are the laws concerning the erradication of specific nations, and these are still binding upon the Jews up to this day due to their failure in executing these laws fully in the past Deut20:16,17,25:19.

    For example in 9:4, the Muslims are told to leave the Idolators who do not break their aggreements, do not fight them or incite others. 8:38 further states that "if they desist, that which is past shall be forgiven to them; and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed". The "desisting" and the "returning" refer to the struggle of the disbelievers against the Muslims. They are urged to stop the fitna lest they be destroyed when their appointed time of respite expires 15:5 like the past nations of vehement rejectors to whom God's messengers were sent 33:60-2"If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease and the agitators in the city do not desist, We shall most certainly set you over them, then they shall not be your neighbors in it but for a little while. Cursed: wherever they are found they shall be seized and murdered, a (horrible) murdering. (Such has been) the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah".

    There is no coercion in religion because truth is made plain through the revelation 2:256,18:29 it becomes self evident against falsehood and thus must naturally prevail over any form of worship that is not the surrender to Allah 3:19,9:33,34:46-47,48:28,61:9. This is according to a universal system established upon Truth, and where falsehood is therefore bound to vanish 15:85,17:81,21:16-8. This prophecy which the prophet saw the fulfillement in his lifetime on the land of Arabia, is particularly made clear in 48:27-8 and does not signify that other religions would at any time entirely disappear. It only indicates that the superiority of the religion of Islam over all other religions will at last be established, and Islam will be the religion of the majority of the nations of the earth. Although it initially addresses a specific nation 6:92,42:7 since the one charged to deliver it was from that particular location, the Quran, because of its pristine nature in relation to the original monotheism and to all of humanity's innate disposition, as well as its universal, timeless relevancy, was meant as mercy to the entire world 62:3"and [to cause this message to spread] from them unto other people as soon as they come into contact with them".
     
    It is the natural right of all Muslims and every human being to 26:227"defend themselves after they are oppressed". The divinely sanctionned right, throughout the ages and nations, of jihad in self defense has a clear objective which is not to gain territorial expansion but to dispel mischief, and corruption/fasad on the earth and stop religious oppression 2:251,22:40. Even though the object of the enemies of Islam when they take on arms and engage Muslims in war is to exterminate them entirely, the Muslims are told that the Divine object in assisting the believers in punishing the disbelievers at war is not to exterminate them, but to deliver a blow that would deter them from continuous agression 3:127.
    Those among non-Muslims against whom self-defensive jihad cannot be directed are those 60:8"who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes..show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice" or those who come in peace without any desire to fight 4:90 and this is because not all non-muslims are alike, and even among the ennemies of Islam some do not strive actively for the extermination of Muslims, they could be influenced by their comunity 60:7"It may be that Allah will bring about friendship between you and those whom you hold to be your enemies among them; and Allah is Powerful; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".

    Many verses, in addition to the ones previously mentionned, and passages lay out the limits of reprisal when one is exercizing his right to self-defence. That aspect of Jihad cannot be directed are those 60:8"who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes..show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice" or those who come in peace without any desire to fight 4:90 and this is because not all of Islam's opponents are alike, some do not strive actively for the extermination of Muslims and should therefore not be fought in the same way as one would engage an armed enemy. They, as well as others could be influenced by their comunity and so the benefit of the doubt is on their side 60:7"It may be that Allah will bring about friendship between you and those whom you hold to be your enemies among them; and Allah is Powerful; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".
    Those upon whom the law of armed self-defense is ordained are 60:9"those who made war upon you on account of (your) religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up (others) in your expulsion". In situations of opression and the infliction of evil on them, the believers must retain their composure and live up to their level of faith and God-consciousness
    by keeping in mind the higher realities. Although they will be in no way blamable for retaliating and defending themselves with the same level of evil they have suffered, they should prefer magnanimity whenever pardoning can be conducing to reconcilement and possible reforming of the evil doer.  And since in that case it necessarily involves the selfless act of
    supressing of one's own feelings for the sake of a higher truth, Allah reassures the person that the corresponding reward is well kept with Him and the Quran concludes once again by upholding and praising the virtues of patience and forgiveness in adversity, as well as recognizing the great resolve such an attitude requires 2:177,42:37-43.

    The Prophet's conflict with his tribe was not because of any worldly reason; it was only for the freedom to practice the religion of God 4:74,94 in the place originally dedicated for it.
    He wanted the leaders of the Quraysh to fulfill their obligations towards the House of God because they were its custodians. If they were not ready for this, then they had no right to keep it in their custody nor did they have any right to stop people through persecution from embracing the religion of God or practicing their worship on a land settled for the universal worship of the One God since the days of Ibrahim 22:25-9. This was Allah's way before in regards to a land declared sacred but whose purpose was perverted and progressively abandonned by a people who despite knowing God, had perverted His ways Gen15:16,Deut9,1Sam4:7. They would intimidate any convert to Islam or anyone willing to embrace it. It was to eliminate this fitna that the Prophet was ordered to dislodge the Quraysh from Mecca. And when he did so as prophecied publicly as a matter of warning at the very beginning of his prophetic call, people hastened to accept Islam in multitudes now that they were suddenly afforded with the liberty to choose their own religion, in total freedom from the shackles of the Quraysh. 110:2 predicted this reality long before the conquest of Mecca "And you see men embrace the religion of God in multitudes", and this was through the guidance of the Heavenly Book that transcended all obstacles to give life to the spiritually dead 6:122.



      garbage....  but  dear Gas  I am curious.,  are you really writing all that junk or or copy/pasting it?

    with best
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Hundreds of Questions to Ask a Muslim
     Reply #506 - August 12, 2018, 03:05 PM

    How do you have sex with beard ?
  • Previous page 1 ... 15 16 17« Previous thread | Next thread »