freediver wrote on Jul 10
th, 2017 at 6:42pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9
th, 2017 at 9:49pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 9
th, 2017 at 8:15pm:
Kill the Mushriken wherever you find them.
[but]So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous.
Gandalf, are you arguing that this is not a misrepresentation of 9:7, which actually says:
7. How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-MuttaqunAre you not misrepresenting a verse about people Muslims have a treaty with as being generally applicable?
Lets see who else is misinterpreting...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Verse A bit of reading for you - you'll find the article is full of scholarly arguments asserting that chapter 9 has a specific context - namely that the "kill the infidels" commands are directed only at those infidels who had already broken a treaty with the muslims, and had attacked first - eg:
Quote:As per Muhammad Abdel-Haleem, translator of the Qur'an, while contextualizing 9:5 and bringing the wider sequential narrative:
It was these hardened polytheists in Arabia, who would accept nothing other than the expulsion of the Muslims or their reversion to paganism, and who repeatedly broke their treaties, that the Muslims were ordered to treat in the same way – to fight them or expel them. Even with such an enemy Muslims were not simply ordered to pounce on them and reciprocate by breaking the treaty themselves; instead, an ultimatum was issued, giving the enemy notice, that after the four sacred months mentioned in 9:5 above, the Muslims would wage war on them. The main clause of the sentence ‘kill the polytheists’ is singled out by some Western scholars to represent the Islamic attitude to war; even some Muslims take this view and allege that this verse abrogated other verses on war. This is pure fantasy, isolating and decontextualising a small part of a sentence. The full picture is given in 9:1–15, which gives many reasons for the order to fight such polytheists. They continuously broke their agreements and aided others against the Muslims, they started hostilities against the Muslims, barred others from becoming Muslims, expelled Muslims from the Holy Mosque and even from their own homes. At least eight times the passage mentions their misdeeds against the Muslims. Consistent with restrictions on war elsewhere in the Qur’an, the immediate context of this ‘Sword Verse’ exempts such polytheists as do not break their agreements and who keep the peace with the Muslims (9:7). It orders that those enemies seeking safe conduct should be protected and delivered to the place of safety they seek (9:6). The whole of this context to v.5, with all its restrictions, is ignored by those who simply isolate one part of a sentence to build their theory of war in Islam on what is termed ‘The Sword Verse’ even when the word ‘sword’ does not occur anywhere in the Qur’an
and lets not forget what you said about wikipedia:
freediver wrote on Mar 19
th, 2017 at 3:34pm:
Gandalf, I suspect that most people consider wikipedia to be a far more reliable source of information than this site. For most general knowledge, many people use it as their go-to source for pretty much everything. If you insert something incorrect, particularly on such a controversial topic, it gets corrected within the hour. Try it.
What do you think FD - do you think this wikipedia article to be "a far more reliable source of information than this site" (ie your opposing interpretation)? Do you still reckon that if someone had inserted something incorrect, it would have been "corrected with the hour"?