There's bound to be bias, yeah. But at least Rabbi scholars learn about it to a scholarly level. Nazis, or Anti-Semites do not.
No it doesn't. Read every line again:
9:6- And if anyone of the polytheists asks you for protection, give him protection so that he may hear the Word of God; then escort him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.
That was 9:5. I just quoted 9:6 for you. Try to read the passage as a whole in context.
The 4 months was basically giving the Pagan Arabs time to leave.
These verses were specifically aimed at the Pagan Arabs who'd attacked and fought against Muhammad and his people from day 1. And even after agreeing to peace they still kept breaking those peace treaties. And these verses were saying "enough's enough, we can't trust you, either join us or you have 4 months to leave."
And yet still you're told in 9:6 that if any of them want to disassociate themselves from the rest of the Pagans, and ask for protection they'll be granted it.
Breaking peace treaties and continuously attacking your people usually is taken as a declaration of war.
So you basically admit you're not willing to listen to what any actual learned Muslim has to say about his own book?
Regardless That guy has a Massive following among the Muslim community, so this is what Mainstream Muslims believe.
Also you're still acting like haters have no agenda, or are somehow more learned in the Quran and more trustworthy Lol
He was giving the factual context. You can look up yourself when those verses were revealed and who to. It wasn't to Every Non-Muslim, because that wouldn't even have made sense. It was specifically to the Pagan Arabs who'd wanted Muhammad destroyed from Day 1. You don't need to be an Islamist apologist or a Hater to fact check. However with a subject like this, it wouldn't be a simple fact check, you'd have to do a bit of research. If you can't be bothered with that, then I'd suggest not making up your own interpretation of those verses.
What chapter and verse of the Quran? I've already seen you isolate a single verse taking it out of context from a passage, because I happened to know what verse/passage that was.
Whilst others just took the verse you gave at face value, without even questioning what verse that was and checking the passage themselves.
LOL How can that be cancelled out when it's specifically putting the "violent" verses into context.
Even the verses you're claiming encourage violence really aren't. Not when you read the entire passage, or God forbid the entire Quran.
Do you want me to start posting passages from the Quran that show it to be a humanitarian message? Because we'd be here all day if I did.
It has absolutely nothing to do with terrorist attacks.
I could quote for you "There is no compulsion in Islam" from the Quran 2:256, but you're likely to say that's also cancelled out, despite no Islamic text ever claiming it to be so.
Muhammad's sayings require a lot more historic and situational context than the Quran, because they're isolated sayings in response to a specific question, or situation. How many times are politicians quoted out of context? And it's not like Muhammad is available for a question/answer session.
Fact is you've been brainwashed to believe the Quran and Muhmmad gave a violent message, which simply isn't true. They advocate fighting (which is in the form of killing) at times simply for the Religion to survive all the hate and violence it was receiving.
But Muslims really don't believe in the interpretation you're pulling from whatever hate website, likely because they've actually read the Quran and studied a good portion of Muhammad's life.
Last edited by Darth Thor on Jun 13th, 2017 at 05:33 PM
Said it in another thread, but I'll take the word of the Pope (who is a study of world religions) concerning Islam over some website like religionofpeace.com
That is why it's best to learn from the Torah itself. If someone is so into their religion that they're willing to spend decades studying it, they're bound to have a large investment in it and probably cannot be trusted to give an unbiased account of it.
Yes, but notice how they're only to be given safety if they're willing to hear the "word of God"(that is, to be converted to Islam). Otherwise, they're to be hunted like animals/oppressed.
Mohammed was just as much the aggressor as the pagans. He spread Islam through violent means so of course he came into conflict the pagans. He also raided their caravans beforehand, so, again, it's understandable they didn't want Mohammed and his goons in their lands.
Those you label as 'haters' usually are people who do not mince words and call out Islam for the toxic religion it is.
All he was doing was trying to whitewash Islam. He failed to mention that Mohammed and his followers were the first to actually initiate violence. He is one of the honor brigade and his words mean nothing to me.
I believe it was from the Hadiths. Go and find the exact chapter/verse if you so wish. You can go ahead and try to put it into "context", but be careful not to actually make it look worse like you did the last time.
Like I said before, "context" didn't actually exonerate the violent verse. If anything, it made it look worse. Hell, when you look at the broader context, Mohammed and his ilk were the aggressors in a lot of ways.
Do you want me to start quoting all the violent/hateful/oppressive shit in the Quran and(or) the Hadiths cause then we will definitely be here all day long. Here, I'll start: "While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.""
But it does. It has a lot to do with Islamism and violent Jihadism, as it legitimizes violence and oppression. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out how this leads to radicalization and terrorism, and this is before we even consider the corrosive effect it has on human rights in general.
Well, "There is no compulsion" bit contradicts a whole slew of passages from the Quran/Hadiths and Mohammed's own actions(or the actions of his closest confidants). At best, neither cancels out the other; they simply stand there in contradiction to one another.
Oh you mean Mohammed isn't available for him to try rationalize away his highly problematic beliefs? Either way, if he was here today, he'd be hung for war crimes.
If you really can't see all the violence and oppression in the Quran and the life and actions of Mohammed, then you're the one who's been brainwashed. There's really no way around that.
__________________ And from the ashes he rose, like a black cloud. The Sin of one became the Sin of many.
Last edited by ArtificialGlory on Jun 13th, 2017 at 06:07 PM
Why? The Pope, especially Pope Francis, is not going to say anything bad about any religion, Islam doubly so. Imagine the outrage it would cause. He's the Interfaith guy; even if he privately thought that Islam was the worst thing since Satan, he would still publicly proclaim that Islam is an awesome religion of peace.
__________________ And from the ashes he rose, like a black cloud. The Sin of one became the Sin of many.
Sorry for butting in the middle of conversation, but I believe the reason for the tension between Middle-east and the West isn't something that can be easily explained. There's high possibility that there are many darker secrets which no governments dare to reveal. But that's still my hypothesis anyway.
In term of religion, I believe all religions were created in order to guide humankind to peace and happiness. The goal of all religions are good, but the problem is: how many times have passed since a religion has born?
Human has long history, and religion is the same. Like in case of Buddhism or Christian, how many people can understand the God's message. How many people can understand the message's true meaning, or they just interpret the meaning based on their experience and knowledge? If that's the case, then many people may mislead and misunderstand the origin meaning of the God.
Islam is highly the same, it's a peaceful religion, but the leaders bends the its true meaning and uses it to instill hate into the people.
^ Yeah so it seems everyone has an agenda when interpreting the Quran except of course religionofpeace.com
Scholarly assessments aside, the vast majority of Muslims don't read the Quran as a book enticing hate and violence. Surely that's what matters in a thread named "Why does the Middle-East (aka Muslims) hate the West"
Last edited by Darth Thor on Jun 14th, 2017 at 01:31 PM
Yes, they are, and that's the problem in the world too much hate of the different. We need more communication, not less; More respect, not less - whatever gods people believe or don't believe in.
Tolerance is essential for all, and early Islam was for the time incredibly tolerant, Mohamad didn't kill people who didn't convert instead he allowed them to worship their God, but they were taxed if they wanted to live in territory he controlled.
Most haters, know few Muslims and have never visited or lived in a Muslim country. That said the tolerance in Islam varies nation to nation.
Last edited by Steve Zodiac on Jun 14th, 2017 at 01:43 PM
Well, the Pope's agenda is fairly simple: to offend the fewest people possible while attempting to foster interfaith dialogue. You will therefor never hear him criticize another religion.
They may not do that explicitly, but I think you underestimate the impact it has on the culture and attitudes in general.
__________________ And from the ashes he rose, like a black cloud. The Sin of one became the Sin of many.
I imagine then the Pope just wouldn't comment on the subject, or he'd sweep it aside with a safe comment like "the violence in unfortunate" and leave it at that instead of saying lies as you're implying.
He can't just sweep it aside seeing how Islam is at the center of attention when it comes to terrorist attacks. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and Islam is the squeakiest wheel around.
__________________ And from the ashes he rose, like a black cloud. The Sin of one became the Sin of many.
KMC Community Forums
Jun 12th, 2017 07:32 PM
Excellent post!
