Evidence for God from Science

For a little more, "Unveiling Islam," by Spencer

Islam has been described as "The heaviest chains that ever shackled humanity." The Qur'an's authority in the Muslim world far surpasses the authority the Bible has held in the West. These direct quotes (mostly the Dawood translation from Arabic) are from the Qur'an via "Islam Unveiled:"

Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate. (Sura 9:73)

The true believers fight for the cause of God. But the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan. (Sura 4:76)

When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads...(Sura 47:4)

Slay them wherever you find them. (Sura 2:190)

Arrest them, besiege them. And lie in ambush everywhere for them. (Sura 9:5)

Mohammad is God's Apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. (Sura 48:29)

But he forbids you to make friends with those who have fought against you on account of your religion and driven you from your homes or abetted others to do so. Those that make friends with them are wrongdoers. (Sura 60:9)

He that leaves his dwelling to fight for God and his apostle and is then overtaken by death, shall be rewarded by God. (Sura 4:1)

Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal and maternal aunts...Also married women, except those whom you own as slaves. (Sura 4:23-24)

Blessed are the believers...who restrain their carnal desires (except with their wives and slave-girls, for these are lawful to them). (Sura 23:1)

As for the man or woman who is guilty of theft, cut off their hands to punish them for their crimes. (Sura 5:38)

Women are your fields; go, then, into your fields whence you please. (Sura 2:223)

Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. (Sura 4:34)

Just for comparison, the Old Testament has numerous passages that no Jew nor Christian would take as marching orders for today, nor do these stories have the status of divine commands. Both Jews and Christians have developed highly refined methods of allegorical interpretation through which they view bellicose scriptural passages - but for the Muslim, all of the Qur'an's commands are valid for all time. There have been many, many unsuccessful attempts throughout the history of Islam to temper the aggressive understanding of the Qur'an.

There is no Muslim version of "love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you," or "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn him the other, also." (Matthew 5:39 & 43)

Khomeini's vision of Islam: "Allah did not create men so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious."

There are other written interpretations of law (Reliance of the Traveller, hadiths) worse and more specific than these quotes, but I have limited this review to the Qur'an. The natural human tendency for mercy has prevented the letter of the law from being followed in all times and places, but violent tenets are central to its text. Militants will always be able to make the case that they are standing for a return to purity in Islam.

Spencer considers the issues of peace vs war, moral values, human rights, respect for women, compatibility with democracy, compatibility with secularism, compatibility with science, and Muslim tolerance toward non-Muslims. In all cases, a literal interpretation of the Qur'an would result in Islam not only receiving a failing grade, but being expelled from school.

Khomeini: "Everything human beings can possibly know is already contained in the Qur'an and the hadith; only naive people can be made to believe there is knowledge beyond them."

"Unveiling Islam" should be read with the realization that it represents one of the more critical amongst the books about Islam you could choose. Hovever, it raises some very strong questions that demand answers and which many westerners, especially those claiming Islam is a religion of peace or just like Christianity, need to know and be aware of.

I'm not an apologist for Islam but I had hoped to point out that it needs to be seen in context. No matter what your opinion of Islam, there are people who believe it to be the true and only way. Some muslims will fight and die for this belief. Is the answer for us to close our society? Or a Christian (moderate or otherwise) theocracy? I think the answer is to engage with muslims, I know it sounds trite but most muslims are not extremists, they are mothers, fathers, sons and daughters with the same hopes and dreams as any of us. I was born the year "the troubles" started and have witnessed first hand how violence and exclusion don't work. I have also seen how engagement and reconciliation do work,that's what defeated terrorism and not just in Ireland but in South Africa too.

Turgonian I would refer you to "the spanish Inquisition" and I would argue the enlightenment was a product of the protestant reformation which diluted Roman Catholic authority (and thus ended totalitarianism) and the printing press which allowed the disemmination of ideas.

Canuckster1127 wrote:

Aviatrix wrote:"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you in the matters of your religion and those who did not expel you from your homes, that you show them courtesy and kindness and act justly with them because Allah loves those who are Just." (Al-Mumtahanah: 8 .)

I've seen that ayat discussed before and discounted on two basis:

1. Fight you in terms of your religion is taken to mean either they are Islam or they do not in any way disagree with Islam which can be taken to a very far extreme.

2. Such verses identified in the Quran are seen as earlier and overridden by the more militant and violent verses that came later from Mohommed's increasing violence.

1. I live in the USA. My neighbors aren't Muslim. But they don't fight me in terms of religion. This country, to its tremendous credit, champions the rights of citizens to freely practice religion, even if it's not Christianity. This verse easily applies to Muslims living in America today. The Muslims have no reason to fight the Americans here who disagree with Islam on multiple levels (really, they do, and at times it's difficult.) But they aren't forcing us to abandon the religion, are they? Yet this wasn't always the case, when freedom of religion was the norm. Many people disagree with Islam, that doesn't mean it's acceptable to fight them. Fighting in terms of religion means just that--preventing worship. If, for example, they wouldn't let the Muslims go into the mosques.

2. This was actually one of the later verses revealed, after several battles and towards the end of the revelation. Remember that the Quraysh were persecuting the Muslims, and preventing the adherance to this religion. However, the Muslims were instructed to respect those who respected their right to practice religion. It doesn't mean everyone had to become Muslim.

Remember that one of the later verses states 'Let there be no compulsion in religion.' (Misrepresented by the pope, who said it was an early verse.) It wouldn't make sense early on, Muslims didn't have the power to force anyone. But when they had that power, later on, they were commanded not to force people.

Where are the moderate muslims in the Middle East rising up and reining in the jihadi's?

What is a jihadi?

Hi Canuckster... Robert Spencer is a scary guy. Whether he is willfully misunderstanding, deliberately deceiving, or just plain confused, I cannot say, but his intention is clearly to prove that Islam is evil.

Do you agree that this is his intention?

His books attempt to do this by taking verses from the Qur'an out of context (he sometimes won't even quote the whole verse, it seems) and focusing on the ideas that modern people have trouble understanding. Islam is not supposed to be "politically correct," and say oh, men and women are equal. Let's be real, they're not. So the Qur'an mandates that men treat women with respect, allow them the privilege of not working, ensure they are cared for financially, and insists upon respect to parents. This is elaborated in hadith literature, the emphasis on the mother.

The big problem though is that Islam allows defensive war. It's not a problem with islam, it's a problem with how the west thinks about religion. Islam is a complete way of life, and happens to cover that issue as well. If a Muslim country were attacked, does it have the right to defend itself?

...

...

yes.

Good article: Forcing people/kill verses http://mercyofallah.com/misc/misc1.html

Aviatrix wrote:

Canuckster1127 wrote:

Aviatrix wrote:"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you in the matters of your religion and those who did not expel you from your homes, that you show them courtesy and kindness and act justly with them because Allah loves those who are Just." (Al-Mumtahanah: 8 .)

I've seen that ayat discussed before and discounted on two basis:

1. Fight you in terms of your religion is taken to mean either they are Islam or they do not in any way disagree with Islam which can be taken to a very far extreme.

2. Such verses identified in the Quran are seen as earlier and overridden by the more militant and violent verses that came later from Mohommed's increasing violence.

1. I live in the USA. My neighbors aren't Muslim. But they don't fight me in terms of religion. This country, to its tremendous credit, champions the rights of citizens to freely practice religion, even if it's not Christianity. This verse easily applies to Muslims living in America today. The Muslims have no reason to fight the Americans here who disagree with Islam on multiple levels (really, they do, and at times it's difficult.) But they aren't forcing us to abandon the religion, are they? Yet this wasn't always the case, when freedom of religion was the norm. Many people disagree with Islam, that doesn't mean it's acceptable to fight them. Fighting in terms of religion means just that--preventing worship. If, for example, they wouldn't let the Muslims go into the mosques.

2. This was actually one of the later verses revealed, after several battles and towards the end of the revelation. Remember that the Quraysh were persecuting the Muslims, and preventing the adherance to this religion. However, the Muslims were instructed to respect those who respected their right to practice religion. It doesn't mean everyone had to become Muslim.

Remember that one of the later verses states 'Let there be no compulsion in religion.' (Misrepresented by the pope, who said it was an early verse.) It wouldn't make sense early on, Muslims didn't have the power to force anyone. But when they had that power, later on, they were commanded not to force people.

Where are the moderate muslims in the Middle East rising up and reining in the jihadi's?

What is a jihadi?

Aviatrix,

I understand what you are saying.

I am not attempting to paint Islam or Muslims with a broad brush.

I understand that there are many in Islam who do not accept the militant practices of many within the extreme wings of Islam.

The issues I have with Islam in terms of how many in the west view it are:

1. The roots of Militant Islam are within the Qu'ran itself with little within to counter or balance the aggressive elements.

2. Westerner's who seek to understand Islam through the prism of the history of Christianity and Judaism are engaged in fallacious thinking as the foundations of the religions are not rooted in similar values. Prime in this assertion is that there is no command within the Quran to love one's enemies.

3. Western attitudes toward the history of the Crusades and their apologetic response to Islam today, fails to understand that Islam is expansionistic by nature and that many of the countries today considered "Islam" used to be Christian and were conquered and taken by force of sword, not the force of the teaching of Islam itself.

4. Birth rates inside the Islam nations, open immigration policies in the west, etc are allowing for the spread of Islamic influence while their policies of a more closed society, limit the intrusion of non-Muslim ideas and secularization which in turn fuels militant Islam to view the outside world as a threat to fought against, rather than to be assimilated.

I can take it further as needed.

As a Christian, I make no apology for my belief that Christ is the only way God has provided for salvation. I accept that there are Muslims of good will with no ill intent who are willing to live in tolerance with Christians and other faiths.

My problem, as I learn more in this area, is that Islam as it is proliferating in the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and now more and more within Europe, but mostly within the theocratic Islamic states, is not the same as what is appealed to as a religion of peace outside that context.

Further, the more I examine and know about the Quran, the more I see that it does not balance itself.

That's where I'm coming from.

Bart

Aviatrix wrote:I've seen that ayat discussed before and discounted on two basis:
1. I live in the USA. My neighbors aren't Muslim. But they don't fight me in terms of religion. This country, to its tremendous credit, champions the rights of citizens to freely practice religion, even if it's not Christianity. This verse easily applies to Muslims living in America today. The Muslims have no reason to fight the Americans here who disagree with Islam on multiple levels (really, they do, and at times it's difficult.) But they aren't forcing us to abandon the religion, are they? Yet this wasn't always the case, when freedom of religion was the norm. Many people disagree with Islam, that doesn't mean it's acceptable to fight them. Fighting in terms of religion means just that--preventing worship. If, for example, they wouldn't let the Muslims go into the mosques.

You still haven't addressed Suras 61:9, 48:28 and 9:33... As they continue to state their objective: in order to prevail over all other religions - even if the polytheists get annoyed.

Aviatrix wrote:2. This was actually one of the later verses revealed, after several battles and towards the end of the revelation. Remember that the Quraysh were persecuting the Muslims, and preventing the adherance to this religion. However, the Muslims were instructed to respect those who respected their right to practice religion. It doesn't mean everyone had to become Muslim.

Quote: Islamic armies, imbued with what Mohammed claimed was divine authorization, imposed Islam by force over vast areas, all the while extorting wealth from subjugated Jews and Christians to fund their ongoing conquests. As noted, major defeats at Tours, France, in A.D. 732, and again at Vienna, Austria, in A.D. 1683, halted Islam's attempt to take all of Europe by force. Gradually Islamic forces were forced to retreat from Europe, except for part of the Balkans. But Islam has again set its sights on a conquest of Europe and of European civilization, wherever the latter has spread to North and South America and other regions. Muslim strategists ask their followers, Why do we find in these modern times that Allah has entrusted most of the world's oil wealth primarily to Muslim nations?

Islams answer: Allah foresaw Islam's need for funds to finance a final politico-religious victory over what Islam perceives as its ultimate enemy: Christianized Euro-American civilization. So, Islam follows Nazism, fascism and communism as the world's latest hostile takeover aspirant.

Let's not forget, these surahs were produced well before the invasions of A.D. 1683.. I wonder what was driving them then??

Aviatrix wrote:Remember that one of the later verses states 'Let there be no compulsion in religion.' (Misrepresented by the pope, who said it was an early verse.) It wouldn't make sense early on, Muslims didn't have the power to force anyone. But when they had that power, later on, they were commanded not to force people.

As of yet you still haven't produced a verse to defend this clause.. I'm sorry..

Canuckster1127 wrote:For a little more, "Unveiling Islam," by Spencer

Islam has been described as "The heaviest chains that ever shackled humanity." The Qur'an's authority in the Muslim world far surpasses the authority the Bible has held in the West. These direct quotes (mostly the Dawood translation from Arabic) are from the Qur'an via "Islam Unveiled:"

Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate. (Sura 9:73)

The true believers fight for the cause of God. But the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan. (Sura 4:76)

When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads...(Sura 47:4)

Slay them wherever you find them. (Sura 2:190)

Arrest them, besiege them. And lie in ambush everywhere for them. (Sura 9:5)

Mohammad is God's Apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. (Sura 48:29)

But he forbids you to make friends with those who have fought against you on account of your religion and driven you from your homes or abetted others to do so. Those that make friends with them are wrongdoers. (Sura 60:9)

He that leaves his dwelling to fight for God and his apostle and is then overtaken by death, shall be rewarded by God. (Sura 4:1)

Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal and maternal aunts...Also married women, except those whom you own as slaves. (Sura 4:23-24)

Blessed are the believers...who restrain their carnal desires (except with their wives and slave-girls, for these are lawful to them). (Sura 23:1)

As for the man or woman who is guilty of theft, cut off their hands to punish them for their crimes. (Sura 5:38)

Women are your fields; go, then, into your fields whence you please. (Sura 2:223)

Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. (Sura 4:34)

Just for comparison, the Old Testament has numerous passages that no Jew nor Christian would take as marching orders for today, nor do these stories have the status of divine commands. Both Jews and Christians have developed highly refined methods of allegorical interpretation through which they view bellicose scriptural passages - but for the Muslim, all of the Qur'an's commands are valid for all time. There have been many, many unsuccessful attempts throughout the history of Islam to temper the aggressive understanding of the Qur'an.

There is no Muslim version of "love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you," or "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn him the other, also." (Matthew 5:39 & 43)

Khomeini's vision of Islam: "Allah did not create men so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious."

There are other written interpretations of law (Reliance of the Traveller, hadiths) worse and more specific than these quotes, but I have limited this review to the Qur'an. The natural human tendency for mercy has prevented the letter of the law from being followed in all times and places, but violent tenets are central to its text. Militants will always be able to make the case that they are standing for a return to purity in Islam.

Spencer considers the issues of peace vs war, moral values, human rights, respect for women, compatibility with democracy, compatibility with secularism, compatibility with science, and Muslim tolerance toward non-Muslims. In all cases, a literal interpretation of the Qur'an would result in Islam not only receiving a failing grade, but being expelled from school.

Khomeini: "Everything human beings can possibly know is already contained in the Qur'an and the hadith; only naive people can be made to believe there is knowledge beyond them."

"Unveiling Islam" should be read with the realization that it represents one of the more critical amongst the books about Islam you could choose. Hovever, it raises some very strong questions that demand answers and which many westerners, especially those claiming Islam is a religion of peace or just like Christianity, need to know and be aware of.

I haven't read "Unveiling Islam" but I am now in the process of reading Spencer's "The Politically Incorrect Gude to Islam and the Crusades." His souces are Islamic sources. I don't see that Spencer takes Qur'anic verses out of context.

You are correct that the violence we see today and have indeed seen from the times of Muhammad can be traced back to the Qur'an. Jesus taught a better way.

The Christian Crusades, horrible that some of the actions were, were in direct result of the aggression of Muslims, many, many years of it. In other words, the Christians started fighting back.

You are also correct that there is no golden rule in the Qur'an. I asked some Muslims to produce one and they couldn't.

This is a little history of early Islam.

Notice how closely Islam's inception is associated with war. From 623 to 777, a span of 154 years, there are 83 military conflicts involving the Muslims...and that is just what I have recorded here. Is Islam a religion of peace? Muslims tell me it is. But....

570 - Birth of Muhammad in Mecca into the tribe of Quraish.
577 - Muhammad's mother dies
580 - Death of Abdul Muttalib, Muhammad's grandfather.
583 - First journey to Syria with a trading Caravan
595 - Muhammad marries Khadijah a rich widow several years older than him.
595 - Second journey to Syra
598 - His son, Qasim, is born
600 - His daughter, Zainab, is born
603 - His daughter, Um-e-Kalthum, is born
604 - His daughter, Ruqayya, is born
605 - Placement of Black Stone in Ka'aba.
605 - His daughter, Fatima, is born
610 - Mohammed, in a cave on Mt. Hira, hears the angel Gabriel tell him that
Allah is the only true God.
613 - Muhammad's first public preaching of Islam at Mt. Hira. Gets few converts.
615 - Muslims persecuted by the Quraish.
619 - Marries Sau'da and Aisha
620 - Institution of five daily prayers
622 - Muhammad immigrates from Mecca to Medina, which was then called Yathrib, gets
more converts.
623 - Battle of Waddan
623 - Battle of Safwan
623 - Battle of Dul-'Ashir
624 - Muhammad and converts begin raids on caravans to fund the movement.
624 - Zakat becomes mandatory
624 - Battle of Badr
624 - Battle of Bani Salim
624 - Battle of Eid-ul-Fitr and Zakat-ul-Fitr
624 - Battle of Bani Qainuqa'
624 - Battle of Sawiq
624 - Battle of Ghatfan
624 - Battle of Bahran
625 - Battle of Uhud. 70 Muslims are killed.
625 - Battle of Humra-ul-Asad
625 - Battle of Banu Nudair
625 - Battle of Dhatur-Riqa
626 - Battle of Badru-Ukhra
626 - Battle of Dumatul-Jandal
626 - Battle of Banu Mustalaq Nikah
627 - Battle of the Trench
627 - Battle of Ahzab
627 - Battle of Bani Quraiza
627 - Battle of Bani Lahyan
627 - Battle of Ghaiba
627 - Battle of Khaibar
628 - Muhammad signs treaty with Quraish.
630 - Muhammad conquers Mecca.
630 - Battle of Hunsin.
630 - Battle of Tabuk
632 - Muhammad dies.
632 - Abu-Bakr, Muhammad's father-in-law, along with Umar, begin a military move to
enforce Islam in Arabia.
633 - Battle at Oman
633 - Battle at Hadramaut.
633 - Battle of Kazima
633 - Battle of Walaja
633 - Battle of Ulleis
633 - Battle of Anbar
634 - Battle of Basra,
634 - Battle of Damascus
634 - Battle of Ajnadin.
634 - Death of Hadrat Abu Bakr. Hadrat Umar Farooq becomes the Caliph.
634 - Battle of Namaraq
634 - Battle of Saqatia.
635 - Battle of Bridge.
635 - Battle of Buwaib.
635 - Conquest of Damascus.
635 - Battle of Fahl.
636 - Battle of Yermuk.
636 - Battle of Qadsiyia.
636 - Conquest of Madain.
637 - Battle of Jalula.
638 - Battle of Yarmouk.
638 - The Muslims defeat the Romans and enter Jerusalem.
638 - Conquest of Jazirah.
639 - Conquest of Khuizistan and movement into Egypt.
641 - Battle of Nihawand
642 - Battle of Rayy in Persia
643 - Conquest of Azarbaijan
644 - Conquest of Fars
644 - Conquest of Kharan.
644 - Umar is murdered. Othman becomes the Caliph.
647 - Conquest of the island of Cypress
644 - Uman dies and is succeeded by Caliph Uthman.
648 - Campaign against the Byzantines.
651 - Naval battle against the Byzantines.
654 - Islam spreads into North Africa
656 - Uthman is murdered. Ali become Caliph.
658 - Battle of Nahrawan.
659 - Conquest of Egypt
661 - Ali is murdered.
662 - Egypt falls to Islam rule.
666 - Sicily is attacked by Muslims
677 - Siege of Constantinople
687 - Battle of Kufa
691 - Battle of Deir ul Jaliq
700 - Sufism takes root as a sect of Islam
700 - Military campaigns in North Africa
702 - Battle of Deir ul Jamira
711 - Muslims invade Gibraltar
711 - Conquest of Spain
713 - Conquest of Multan
716 - Invasion of Constantinople
732 - Battle of Tours in France.
740 - Battle of the Nobles.
741 - Battle of Bagdoura in North Africa
744 - Battle of Ain al Jurr.
746 - Battle of Rupar Thutha
748 - Battle of Rayy.
749 - Battle of lsfahan
749 - Battle of Nihawand
750 - Battle of Zab
772 - Battle of Janbi in North Africa
777 - Battle of Saragossa in Spain

Source: http://www.carm.org/islam/islam_chronology.htm

Tell me that these wars were all in self-defense.

Those who are reading the writings of Robert Spencer may also be interested in his two websites, here and here, and this biography of his which outlines his credentials and motives with regard to his interest in Islam.

Since he is outspoken on the subject of Islam, and is a public figure through the publication of his books, he now requires body guards to provide him with any degree of personal safety.
This man cannot speak the truth without his life being seriously at risk and therefore needing constant protection.
If it is not the truth that he is speaking, he is open to correction - but so far no "correction" has been made that is founded in truth.

Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate. (Sura 9:73)

Here it is, in context:
"O you prophet, strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern in dealing with them. Their destiny is Hell; what a miserable abode! They swear by GOD that they never said it, although they have uttered the word of disbelief; they have disbelieved after becoming submitters. In fact, they gave up what they never had. They have rebelled even though GOD and His messenger have showered them with His grace and provisions. If they repent, it would be best for them. But if they turn away, GOD will commit them to painful retribution in this life and in the Hereafter. They will find no one on earth to be their lord and master.

Some of them even pledged: "If GOD showered us with His grace, we would be charitable, and would lead a righteous life." But when He did shower them with His provisions, they became stingy, and turned away in aversion. Consequently, He plagued them with hypocrisy in their hearts, till the day they meet Him. This is because they broke their promises to GOD, and because of their lying. Do they not realize that GOD knows their secrets, and their conspiracies, and that GOD is the Knower of all secrets? Those who criticize the generous believers for giving too much, and ridicule the poor believers for giving too little, GOD despises them. They have incurred a painful retribution. Whether you ask forgiveness for them, or do not ask forgiveness for them - even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times - GOD will not forgive them. This is because they disbelieve in GOD and His messenger. GOD does not guide the wicked people."

Obviously, this is referring to soldiers who joined Islam simply for the sake of eroding it within. At-Tauba (9) was delivered right before the outbreak a war between the Muslims and the pagans.

The true believers fight for the cause of God. But the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan. (Sura 4:76)

"Why should you not fight in the cause of GOD when weak men, women, and children are imploring: "Our Lord, deliver us from this community whose people are oppressive, and be You our Lord and Master." Those who believe are fighting for the cause of GOD, while those who disbelieve are fighting for the cause of tyranny. Therefore, you shall fight the devil's allies; the devil's power is nil."
This is gives orders to liberate people from oppression, not to declare war against other faiths on grounds of religion alone.

When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads...(Sura 47:4)

As gruesome as that sounds, consider the amount of suffering someone goes through after being decapitated.

Slay them wherever you find them. (Sura 2:190)

The author didn't even bother to quote the entire sentence here, let alone the paragraph fostering it:
"You may fight in the cause of GOD against those who attack you, but do not aggress. GOD does not love the aggressors. You may kill those who wage war against you, and you may evict them whence they evicted you. Oppression is worse than murder. Do not fight them at the Sacred Masjid, unless they attack you therein. If they attack you, you may kill them. This is the just retribution for those disbelievers. If they refrain, then GOD is Forgiving, Most Merciful. You may also fight them to eliminate oppression, and to worship GOD freely. If they refrain, you shall not aggress; aggression is permitted only against the aggressors."

Arrest them, besiege them. And lie in ambush everywhere for them. (Sura 9:5)

Another rule of combat. Not to be applied to everyday life.

Mohammad is God's Apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. (Sura 48:29)

Proceeded by a prophesy of Mecca's liberation. Another reference to the battlefield. The unbelievers are actually warriors.

But he forbids you to make friends with those who have fought against you on account of your religion and driven you from your homes or abetted others to do so. Those that make friends with them are wrongdoers. (Sura 60:9)

"GOD may change the animosity between you and them into love. GOD is Omnipotent. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful. GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable. GOD enjoins you only from befriending those who fight you because of religion, evict you from your homes, and band together with others to banish you. You shall not befriend them. Those who befriend them are the transgressors."

He that leaves his dwelling to fight for God and his apostle and is then overtaken by death, shall be rewarded by God. (Sura 4:1)

And you objection to this, is?

Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal and maternal aunts...Also married women, except those whom you own as slaves. (Sura 4:23-24)

Blessed are the believers...who restrain their carnal desires (except with their wives and slave-girls, for these are lawful to them). (Sura 23:1)

If a person marries a slave or conceives a child by her, then that slave is freed by law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_I ... _as_slaves
This encourages emancipation of slaves, actually.

As for the man or woman who is guilty of theft, cut off their hands to punish them for their crimes. (Sura 5:3)

http://www.submission.org/satan/theft.html

Women are your fields; go, then, into your fields whence you please. (Sura 2:223)

"Your women are the bearers of your seed. Thus, you may enjoy this privilege however you like, so long as you maintain righteousness. You shall observe GOD, and know that you will meet Him. Give good news to the believers."
That's the translation I have. Contrasting colors, eh?

Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. (Sura 4:34)

http://www.submission.org/women/beating.html

Lizard Man wrote:

I think the Qur'an scripture as the author quoted in here was so sharply scrutinized because it is too legalistic in behaviors a believer to this has to abide by.

In fact, Christian bible does not stipulate codes of behavior too specifically; there are plenty of rooms to judge matter in which God is the most important one to help. I think truth and jugde about issues like "should we go to war?" is quite difficult to handle. I was invariably told that the world now a day is under devil's rein. Aggression and atrocity is rampant everywhere that is deprived of satisfactory divine explanation.

I passionately believe that there is absolute judge from God what conviction is right in various contentious issues. These may be beyond our sketch of reach; (that's why King Solomon asked God for wisdom in governing the country).

It occurs to me it is still wrong for Qu'an to put things too legalistic in their sermon writings.

In New Testament, Jesus came to teach that laws actually fail in putting people right with God, but by grace, mercy and love believers can have hope and persistence. It is a backsliding practice to translate the meaning of bible from spiritual teaching to legalistic teaching.

Subjectively as my viewpoint could go, please feel free to let me know how you think and I am not being offensive to any other religion; I think a good forum is some place people are free to speak without aggression against others.

Oriental.

.

I would just like to ask a simple question...

If a country decided to attack the USA, for example, enslave its population, and absolutely prohibit the practice of any religion, what would be the response?

Would the USA be allowed to defend itself?

Would the USA be allowed to prevent the other country from oppressing other people?

Is the USA morally and religiously justified in doing this?

Or should the entire country love its enemy, turn the other cheek, and allow the invaders to oppress everyone?

This is hypothetical and I don't mean to apply it to current foreign policy.

Loving your enemies is a good religious practice. It keeps people from becoming bitter.

But I really can't argue with how you're comparing the teachings of the Christ Jesus peace be upon him and those of Muhammad, peace be upon him. This is because you're looking through a filter to see Islam.

Islam is more than just a religion. Islam is your diet, Islam is your government, Islam is your habits, Islam is your goals, Islam is your complete and total way of life.

God, being the Creator of mankind, knows what is best for mankind. And he has prescribed a way of life for those who wish to devote themselves to him. It is Islam, and it pervades every aspect of life. You have to start with this foundation in order to even attempt to understand Islam.

As for the rest, I'm starting to think this topic is going off its original track, so I really don't want to respond.

Let there be no compulsion in religion. Any Muslim who attempts to force Muslims to practice Islam, or non-Muslims to practice Islam, is in direct violation of the Qur'an, period. God does not love aggressors. Any Muslim who wants to oppress a population, go to war with them purely for conquest is aggressing--see last sentence.

Thanks for your time.

The original post which began this thread suggested an idea by which we could look at the arguments concerning the existence of God. Essentially this was to be a role played court room exercise, Christians versus Atheists.

Since that was not exactly compatible with Board Purpose, we moved through the fact that there is no absolute proof for God's existence other than evidence that points strongly to that very real possibility, and to some discussion on how we read each other on messages boards. The original poster briefly mentioned a concern actually felt by many of us Down Here in Australasia towards a close Islamic neighbour, and although the dialogue quickly moved on elsewhere, that brief reference was picked up to protest a widely held view of Islam as a totalitarian ideology. From there we have grown a thread being used to explore Islam and what is and isn't written (or meant) in the Qur'an.

I agree with Aviatrix that we have strayed right off topic although the original topic was rather a non-starter. I believe Aviatrix has posted with sensitivity to the fact that this is a Christian forum, and for that he is to be commended. Many of us in the western world are very concerned by the expansion of Islam, the threat to our culture and Judeo-Christian based civilization, and the push by some to have Shariah Law introduced in places where there are unassimilated communities of Muslims. This fear is not based on some collective fantasy, nor it is something whipped up by journalists who want to keep us riding on adrenaline. Our concerns are based solidly on facts. That we hear only silence from "moderate Muslims" where we had hoped they might reign in their more devout brothers who are calling for our blood increases our concern. What we read in the Qur'an increases our concern. And despite the attempts of Lizard Man and Aviatrix to reassure us with their exposition of Qur'anic texts, many of us have knowledge of the principle of abrogation that negates certain of the more peaceful surah that Mohammad had revealed in his earleir Mecca period. We also know that deception is embedded in Islam and evident in the taqiyya of clerics who would have an ulterior agenda and no wish to reveal their honest cause. To reassure us otherwise does nothing to foster trust, but only to increase distrust in view of the real life events that occur around the world - the beheadings, the violent outrages, the acts of terrorism, the attempts to clamp down on our freedom of speech in our own countries, the lack of reciprocity in freedom to worship, and so it goes on. These are realities which are hard to correlate with what we are told we should be reading out of the Qur'an, but they stack up perfectly with the more violent messages in there. So we are not going to deny our real experience of Islam at our gates and be coaxed into seeing a lamb when it is a lion that is roaring out there instead.

But Aviatrix is quite right that this thread has strayed, and I know it is unlikely that we are going to agree on much else. I wish that the "no compulsion in religion" surah had not been abrogated, and I would like to believe that his final few sentences here honestly represented the beliefs of all Muslims, not just a few.

Thanks for your time here, Aviatrix, and your courtesy and sensitivity which has been much appreciated.

Your post made me cry, Judah.

Perhaps I haven't had enough sleep to be reading well and focusing hurt them, or perhaps it was the content. Let me explain... last night I spent in prayer. This is the month of Ramadhan, a holy month for Muslims where we fast during the daytime and pray through the night time. At night, we pray listening to someone recite the Qur'an. I got home from that around 11:30pm, and got up at 3:30am (no I didn't go to sleep right away, I posted here) to go pray again another prayer at night to make supplication to God. I prayed roughly 4-5am, ate a small breakfast at the mosque and then prayed the regular morning prayer. After doing this for a few days I'm starting to get short on sleep, you see. This is Islam... a religion where worshippers give up food to fast for God, they give up sleep to pray to God, and give up their wealth in charity. Does that terrify you? Because that is a fact.

But Aviatrix is quite right that this thread has strayed, and I know it is unlikely that we are going to agree on much else. I wish that the "no compulsion in religion" surah had not been abrogated, and I would like to believe that his final few sentences here honestly represented the beliefs of all Muslims, not just a few.

This ayat which commands "no compulsion in religion" (ayat is like a verse, literally it means sign) is in surah Baqara (surah is like a chapter but it means a wall) which is the 2nd in the Qur'an. Surah al-Baqara was one of the last surahs revealed in the Qur'an (definitely Medinan! not Meccan). It certainly was not abrogated. Furthermore, the ayat itself was not abrogated. The idea of abrogation is often misunderstood. No verse in the Qur'an has been cancelled or nullified, only clarified. (An example is that it's not allowed to be drunk when you pray. Later on the Qur'an prohibiting drinking at all. It's still prohibited to pray drunk, and the first ayat never said that you could drink other times, just especially not when you pray. It still applies, if someone has a drinking problem, they should start to fix it by ensuring they are sober when they pray.) But there was not even this to happen to this ayat.

This verse also has no meaning except as a later revelation. At the beginning of the era of Islam, Muslims had no power to force anyone in religion. What would be the purpose of a command not to? They obviously couldn't. But later on, they were given the power, that is they had authority of the city, and the power they had could have been misused to force people in religion. It would be injust to do this, so the Qur'an has commanded Muslims to not force anyone religion. The verse is as true today as it ever was, and it has never ever been abrogated.

I wish all Muslims would stand by the Qur'an, because there is guidance and wisdom in it. This they have forsaken for their desires for power.

Aviatrix, I feel really sad too.
A great many things about Islam makes me really sad, and horrified and scared to death as well.
I don't want to say too much more about it here, other than that all of my sources disagree with you absolutely concerning the nature of nasikh and the action of this theological principle on Surah 2:256 and a great many other surah - 71 out of 114, in fact. These sources include the writings of Islamic scholars with undeniably authoritative credentials, for example Abil-Kasim Hibat-Allah Ibn-Salama Abi-Nasr, the revered scholar who wrote the classical work "al-Nasikh wal-Mansukh" being just one.
There are others as well.
What more can I say?
What you write sounds wonderful, Aviatrix, but it does not match with what is said by those acknowledged to be of high standing in Islam.

If you have the true love of God in your heart for all others (both Muslim and non-Muslim alike) and a desire for real peace (not that which is forced submission to Allah for non-believers) and a willingness to sacrifice to care for others in the way that Jesus did (and still does) then I believe you are a good person regardless. I can sincerely say that I wish all other Muslims were following your understanding of the Qur'an.
I can certainly wish that.

OK, if you want to get back on track, let's look at the question again:

Last night I was sitting up in bed when it occurred to me that the belief in the existence of God is an individual thing based on personal faith. It can never be proved one way or the other legally.

In a court of law the jury and/or judge looks at the preponderance of evidence in order to make a decision.

In my view the existence of God can be "proven" by the preponderance of evidence concerning Jesus' resurrection from the dead.