RB's Reviews > القرآن الكريم

I can see you may get to 1, 2 if you took some text out of the context and read it without other verses or without the other governing general rules that's mentioned in different chapter of the book ... But i cant see how did you reach number 3 ?!!!

I still don't think 1, 2 are correct :) , but some people can reach such conclusion when the text is misread out of context

Surely the linguistic beauty and literature of the Arabic text will not be in the translation but the core meaning should be there.
So ... Yes, you can read the English version and still get essence of the book.

True , there are differences between translations, since after all i cant call them "true translation" but rather they are kind of interpretation of the Arabic text, and honestly i am not sure which to recommend.
When i quote or read certain verses in English i compare between the different translations to get the full aspects of it, This could be non-practical for a non Muslim, or someone who's reading it for the first time trying to know what's in there :)
... I know that Yusif Ali translation is the most common, Pikthall uses some classical English. You will find some review on Amazon very useful about this.

You can always get just one of the copies and if there is unclarity in some parts of it to check different translations online.

Ramy wrote: "I can see you may get to 1, 2 if you took some text out of the context and read it without other verses or without the other governing general rules that's mentioned in different chapter of the boo..."

Have you forgotten that Mohammed's wife Aisha was six years old when they got married? And have you also forgotten how she was only nine (9) years old when he consummated the marriage with her? If that is not encouraging sex with children, then I don't know what is.
Also don't forget that some Islamic countries are still practising the old tradition of child-brides.

But yes, one should read the text in it's original language, a lot will get lost in translation. Same goes with the Old and New Testament. Which is why theologians have to study both Hebrew, Classical Greek and Aramaic before they are even able to complete their studies.

Even when you do read the text in it's original language you will undoubtedly interpret the text in a different way than a person who lived in the time of writing would have. Our perceptions, symbolism, ideas, ways of looking at life, education level, knowledge of the universe, etc. will always be different.

This is what have you seen in Quran!

I'd be completely weirded out if I were in your shoes, but there must have been some sort of mistake with the translation or you misunderstood part of the text.
To answer your first question, there has been absolutely no mention of the legitimisation of violence against women. The Quran was against violence in general, which leads us to your second question: Murder of people of different faith?
The Quran clearly mentions that we cannot force people to enter our religion, we may only advise. So to say that it is ok for us to go around killing people because they do not follow our religion is terrorism, which is banned in Islam.
As for your third question, I cannot be completely sure about it. As a Muslim I read the Quran occasionally, but I didn't memorise it. So my guess is that people who lived over 1400 years ago used to marry at very young ages, not only in the Arab regions. Marriage these days in many, many countries is only permitted to those above 18 years. So bottom line: it's only a matter of times and ages. I don't know where you read that kids are encouraged to get married at a very young age, it's not mentioned anywhere in the Quran.
I appreciate that you voiced (or rather, written down) your opinion though :)

I don't see why this deserves too much discussions and debates. A decent enough insight into general knowledge and history will slap the label "plagiarism + old traditions" on this allegedly divine book.
I am thankful to myself to have read it, as it was a true incentive for drilling deeper into the realities and facts behind its creation for I have always felt that its content is quite questionable besides all the fanatic society members surrounding me. Actually, its divinity free-falls when a single issue is spotted and/or anything in the content is rebutted. Yet, all you get when you discuss with its defending party is funny denial and defense statements. I loathe the "divine entity" footprint it instills in minds, and how its defenders keep handing down their devoid of rationality teachings and keep the brain washing chain on till today! I just can't see why religion's teachings never relinquish control over the minds as the world progresses and how today's technology and tangible counter evidences can't defeat them. People are interesting. They draw their own red lines, and develop their own red-line-crossing-phobia. They also set their minds in a way to suppress any voice coming from the opposite side, developing their ethnocentrism and cultural isolationism implicitly, and on different levels. So why do you find a high review score? Well, they'll simply 5-star it, as it's divine. Some of them here have written (in Arabic): "who am I to rate to a divine book like that?". Yes, pathetically sarcastic.
Simply, Google every idea you think Quran is right about, and/or made it ahead of its time, and you'll retrieve everything mentioned in older sources, or even false assertions that are related to nothing in reality and/or have been scientifically disproved even if they weren't talked about in the past. It takes ages of time for believers to realize in which dark abyss they actually are, quite unfortunately.

Ali wrote: "I don't see why this deserves too much discussions and debates. A decent enough insight into general knowledge and history will slap the label "plagiarism + old traditions" on this allegedly divine..."

Thank you for your insigtful thoughts Ali! :)

http://digitaljournal.com/article/329317

Shanna wrote: "http://digitaljournal.com/article/329317"

Wow. I have no words. I am disgusted. Apperently they don't get the point of the UN Child Convention http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc...
I definitely stand by my words and review.

thank you for sharing this article Shanna!

From the Wiki:
Islamic Republic of Iran has adhered to the convention on 1991 and ratified it in the Parliament in 1994. Iran, however, has made the following reservation “If the text of the Convention is or becomes incompatible with the domestic laws and Islamic standards at any time or in any case, the Government of the Islamic Republic shall not abide by it.”[19] Iran has also signed the both optional protocols which relate to the special protection of children against involvement in armed conflict and the sale of children and sexual exploitation.[20]

Although the Islamic Republic of Iran is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, international human rights organisations[21] and foreign governments[22] routinely denounced executions of Iranian child offenders as a violation of the treaty. But on the Feb. 10, 2012 Iran's parliament changed the controversial law of executing juveniles. In the new law, the age of 18 (solar year) would be for both genders considered and juvenile offenders will be sentenced on a separate law than of adults.” [23][24] Based on the Islamic law which now seems to have been revised, girls at the age of 9 and boys at 15 of lunar year (11 days shorter than a solar year) were fully responsible for their crimes.[23]

Please elaborate, how does it encourage sex with children?? and kindly don't confuse a culture with a religion. There is a great difference between both.

Alia wrote: "Please elaborate, how does it encourage sex with children?? and kindly don't confuse a culture with a religion. There is a great difference between both."

I agree: there is a BIG difference between culture and religion.

Honestly, I'm really tired of explaining my point view to people who are completely blinded by their faith and refuses to see the FACTS. I will do so AGAIN since you have asked me politely.

The historical fact that Mohammed married a 6-year-old and had sex with her when she was 9 AND the fact that Mohammend is seen in the Islamic community as a figure for Muslims to look up to and follow in example. If this does not constitute encouragement, then I do not know what does, and for me this is most certainly encourament.

But, I'd rather ask YOU to explain to me how the Koran and following Mohammed's example does NOT encourage sex with children. I dare you, if you can.

Thank you :)
First, there is not a single verse in the holy Quran that says "Having sex with children is allowed".
Second, prophet Mohamed (Peace be upon him) did marry Lady Aisha at a very young age. Now let me clear some facts. Back then before Islam, it was very normal to find a man marrying a child. That was part of the customs and traditions of that region. When the prophet and lady Aisha consummated their marriage she had already reached her puberty. So, following his footsteps, the whole idea of marrying children is removed. People learned that they are not allowed to marry kids.
Another historical fact, let me remind you that Kings all over Europe had very young wives. King Richard II of England married Isabella of Valois when she was 6 years old, that was in 1396 (not sure about the date). Another example is Henry IV, he married Mary de Bohun when she was 12.
I am saying all this to explain to you that people in the past had different ideas and different life styles, regardless of their religion.

Does not the hadith say he consumated his marriage with her while she was still pure? pre menstruation? And Aisha's hadith she talks about being fondled in the bath prior consumaton.
In what way is a nine year old, even one begininng puberty, not a child?

The kings and queens of europe are not relgious prophets considered worthy of emulation by millions...

I do not believe my eyes. She was N I N E years old!!! In what warped world does 9 years of age constitute adult/womanhood? For the sake of the argument: Let's say that she did get her period at a very young age (this does in fact happen for some girls today): she is still mentally a child and her body is still the developing and growing body of a child. She was a C H I L D that was R A P E D by +40 year old paedophile!

Alia wrote: "First, there is not a single verse in the holy Quran that says "Having sex with children is allowed"

Is there a verse that denounces it? That says the faithful are NOT to follow the example of Prophet in this instance?
Does not sharia permit it? Does Islam inform sharia or sharia inform Islam?
Particularly when country like Iran is moving to legalise marriage of children under ten so as not to contradict with Sharia...
http://digitaljournal.com/article/329317

- Pure means that she was a virgin.
- Going back to history again. Did you know that she was actually engaged to someone else before the prophet?? I just want to explain that this was normal and in that culture, back then, accepted.
- The prophet had enemies back then, don't think if it was not socially accepted they would have accused with it?
- The age of marriage nowadays is high because we have to finish our education and build a career. Back then people had nothing to do. Islam came and set the criteria that AT LEAST people should wait for puberty.
- I said it once and I will say it again. Please don't confuse cultures and religion. One person's behaviour doesn't represent a religion. One country's ideas and culture again doesn't represent a religion.
- You say that we are blinded by our faiths, may be you are blinded by your hatred? Everyone is entitled to have his/her own opinion about anything in this life as long as it is based on facts and insightful research. Question everything that you face but never settle until you find the truth.
- I will have to apologize that I will not be able to participate in this discussion anymore as I will not accept any insult for my prophet. I respect all religions and the messengers of God and for that reason I would not want to take this discussion further :)

You've not actually addressed any of the points we've made... and you're going to avoid it by leaving.
The point wasn't what was socially acceptable back then, it's that islam NOW uses the "socially accepted" past instance of their prophet to justify the marriage of little girls NOW. And there is nothing in the qur'an or Sharia that contradicts it, quite to the contrary...

Alia wrote: "

Alia Naguib - Pure means that she was a virgin.
- Going back to history again. Did you know that she was actually engaged to someone else before the prophet?? I just want to explain that this was normal and in that culture, back then, accepted.
- The prophet had enemies back then, don't think if it was not socially accepted they would have accused with it?
- The age of marriage nowadays is high because we have to finish our education and build a career. Back then people had nothing to do. Islam came and set the criteria that AT LEAST people should wait for puberty.
- I said it once and I will say it again. Please don't confuse cultures and religion. One person's behaviour doesn't represent a religion. One country's ideas and culture again doesn't represent a religion.
- You say that we are blinded by our faiths, may be you are blinded by your hatred? Everyone is entitled to have his/her own opinion about anything in this life as long as it is based on facts and insightful research. Question everything that you face but never settle until you find the truth.
- I will have to apologize that I will not be able to participate in this discussion anymore as I will not accept any insult for my prophet. I respect all religions and the messengers of God and for that reason I would not want to take this discussion further :)
"

- Of course she was a virgin. She was 9 years old! What else did you expect?
- Her prevoius engagement makes this right in what way exactly? Child-brides may have been "normal" in the past, but it doesn't make it right, and it certainly doesn't make it right today.
- Not exactly sure what you mean by your third statement, so I'll let it hang.
- "we have to finish our education" is there a hint of resentment I detect there? Why are you defending the right to marry off pubescent children? They are both physically and mentally immature.
- We are not confusing religion and culture. We just wonder why it is that in some cultures certain religoius practices prevail and not in others: such as the mutilation of female (and male) genitals and the marrying off of children. But guess what: all religion is man-made, just as culture is man-made.
- Blinded by hatred? Really? We're not the ones declaring Jihad on the rest of the world. We know science: that is the only truth about the multiverse.
- No need to apologise. We understand that you have no valid arguments for your need to defending/justifying a paedophinle. If there was a schred of decenty in you and all the others that are defending this child bride practice, you would reject and dissociate yourself from it and legislate against it - but instead you seem to embrace it.

Thank you Yasmina. That was both very insightful and courageous.

Especially in view of recent violence

Are we reviewing books here or Religions?

I believe there is a huge difference between the two (even if that religion is based on a book).

Therefore I find it extremely unfair and unprofessional, to use views about Islam to make a literary criticism of the Quran as a book. And even if Islam does encourage sex with children (Which I personally do not believe is the case) I find it rather weird to use such an argument to criticize the Quran when in fact there isn't even a text in it dealing with that issue!

Back to the story of Aisha... there are discrepancies in dates that reached us about her age when she got married to Mohammad. Many recorded historical facts point out that she wasn't 9 but 17 or even 18 when she was married to the prophet. The 9 years story is based on a Hadith (or saying) attributed to Aisha herself and narrated by Abu Hurraira, whose authenticity has been frequently challenged.

So not only the argument you have used to criticize the book, isn't mentioned at all in the book (neither in a negative or positive way), but it could also be a misconception about the religion altogether.

Greetings.

And even if Islam does encourage sex with children (Which I personally do not believe is the case)
Even as Iran moves to bring marital age of girls to below 10 to be inline with sharia, which is based on the prophet's marriage to Aisha.

Shanna wrote: "And even if Islam does encourage sex with children (Which I personally do not believe is the case)
Even as Iran moves to bring marital age of girls to below 10 to be inline with sharia, which is ba..."

Again, what does this have to do with the "literary" criticism of a book that doesn't at all speak of such an issue?

You are free to criticize Islam as a religion of course and this is what you are doing, but I do not think that this is the right place to do so... Shouldn't be mixing apples and oranges.

As for the article about marital age in Iran... I have my doubts about the integrity of the source... But again this is not the place to discuss it.

Yasmina wrote: "This is evident by the Quran's attitude toward non-believers. It's an attitude of pure contempt. The Quran dehumanizes non-Muslims."

I find your position a bit stereotypical and negatively biased, haven't you read in the Quran (Surat Al Mumtahina Chapter 60?

7. It may be that Allah will grant love (and friendship) between you and those whom ye (now)
hold as enemies: for Allah has power (over all things); and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
8. Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out
of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.
9. Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of
your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and
protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.

Those three verses summarize the entire story, where in them do you find what you are talking about? According to the Quran Muslims must be good to those who are good to them, and fight those who fight them hoping that one day they could become friends too...

But again isn't this common sense?

Mohamed Wrote: "Again, what does this have to do with the "literary" criticism of a book that doesn't at all speak of such an issue?

You are free to criticize Islam as a religion of course and this is what you are doing, but I do not think that this is the right place to do so... Shouldn't be mixing apples and oranges.

As for the article about marital age in Iran... I have my doubts about the integrity of the source... But again this is not the place to discuss it.

http://www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?...
http://www.aina.org/news/201208299315...

I just addressed your point...

As to wether or not this is an appropriate place, I don't think that's your call...
Nor is it inappropriate, one should be able to discuss a book and it's impact (at least Rita is here using words, and not rioting on the streets of cities around the world to express her offense), and while you can separate a religion from the text that generated it, indeed claiming apples and oranges, it's more like apple tree and apples.
You criticise mixing up of apples and oranges and yet in you next post #29 you proselytise to Yasmina seemingly unable to separate your apples and oranges...

Mohamed wrote: "Are we reviewing books here or Religions?

I believe there is a huge difference between the two (even if that religion is based on a book).

Therefore I find it extremely unfair and unprofessional,..."

Thank you for your comment, Mohamed, and it might be wise directing this discussion into the realm of literature.

I'll agree with you in so far as to say that my views on the book as a work of literature may be too closely inter-twined with my personal views on the religion that it represents, I'll grant you that.

But, you cannot, nor should you I think, be serious in claiming that whenever you review a book of this magnitude that you should simply ignore the ramifications and implications that it has for the millions of people that read it and believe every word it says blindly, without questioning it's content. This is a book of great importance, a book that many people take quite literally in ALL of its aspects and as a consequense have preformed and continue to preform many unspeakable acts in its name. You cannot, in this case, separate the apple from the three as Shanna so poingnantly puts it.

The same can be said (though in a less extreme) for other books as well, as for example Rhonda Byrne's The Secret. This books contains many horrific statements that are by many taken at face value by the believers/readers, though as far as I know it hasn't yet spawned acts or terror or direct abuse.

Shanna wrote: "Mohamed Wrote: "Again, what does this have to do with the "literary" criticism of a book that doesn't at all speak of such an issue?

You are free to criticize Islam as a religion of course and thi..."

Apples are issues related to the "Book" such as the allegations of negative attitude towards non-believers. My reply to Yasmina was by quoting from the book, clearly part of the reviewing process.

Oranges are issues unmentioned in the "Book" altogether and unrelated to the reviewing process, such as child marriage.

But it looks like you like oranges more than apples, so lets talk one last time about them.

First of all let me make my position very clear about the issue of child marriage, its an unjustifiable crime and a social and sexual perversion regardless of the justifications.

Now, It is true that you'll find Moslems who believe that it is permissible for a girl to be married at the age of 9, in Iran, in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere luckily they are a minority. They might have a loud voice but seldom do they have the ability to change the legal status. Such people are not an exclusivity of Islam but can be clearly found across the global religious board.


Child marriage has always been a social and economic issue rather than a religious one. This was the case back in the time of the prophet and it continues to be so in our days.

Those latest sources you provided for the marital age in Iran are exactly the ones I said I doubted their integrity. "Mohabat" is a radical Christian group and Aina is part of the Assyrian minority. and under the oppressive regime of Tehran, minorities tend to loose their objectivity as a countermeasure to the extremism of the state (extremism spawns extremism). Those articles are exaggerations used merely as a political bashing technique.

For a more comprehensive and realistic study about the problem of child marriages in the world you might want to have a look at this study sponsored by UNICEF

http://www.childinfo.org/marriage.html

Or this blog.

http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/st...

You'll be surprised to know that child marriages (statistically speaking) is not such a big problem in moslem countries as some have been trying unjustly to portray.

There is much more to be said... but for this forum I think we have said enough.

Best regards...

Samirah wrote: "You just wrote that review because you are filled with hatred for anything that is related to Islam.Otherwise you would have atleast done some research.You should be ashamed of writing what you did..."

Did you read the review? Rita has studied religion, she has researched, unlike you in not actually reading the review.
Rita is not a muslim so why should she, or any non-muslim, be ashamed of critising Mohammad? You don't like insults to your prophet, then don't YOU do it... You don't get to control others opinions. And in view of islamic violence perpetrated on innocent people recently over a crap fifteen minute video your accusation of hatred is misdirected.


I don't think attacking on the christian front is going to work either.

Samirah you are doing a discredit to your faith of peace.
If you bothered to read any posts you would see I have been here in this thread for quite some time so your post could be regarded as poking your nose in...

Shanna wrote: "Samirah wrote: "You just wrote that review because you are filled with hatred for anything that is related to Islam.Otherwise you would have atleast done some research.You should be ashamed of writ..."

Thank you Shanna.

Samirah, how about you start showing US the respect you claim your religion taught you? And even more importantly: are you familiar with the term: freedom of speech? This is MY review. If you don't like what you're reading go elsewhere and stop harassing me.

Besides, I'm not filled with "hatred" towards Islam as you so blatantly put it. I'm an atheist and I am opposed to institutionalised religion in any form: when a religion starts telling people what to do and how to think and take away their responsibility of their own actions and put everything up to being 'Gods will', then I believe that the people who follow such religion should start to wake up and smell reality. I really don't care if that religion is Islam, Judaism or Christianity or whatever.

As Shanna reminds you, I actually have studied religion, Islam was one of the religions that I've studied, and I did study them neutrally and scientifically at University, where no one were getting all hysterical and emotional about what was being discussed. But in this forum, as you can see, some people (yes, I am looking specifically at your Samirah) have their minds completely blinded by faith and lack all common sense and think that just because person A thinks differently than person B than person A should just shut up. You are so wrong there Samirah. Nothing you say will make me change a single word of my review. Or comments. Just like I'm not deleting your comments. Free speech.

All religion poisons everything when you let it cloud your mind like that. Clearly your refined comments show this. Your statements and your disrespectful attitude contradicts completely what you claim your religion stands for and in for this I thank you: you prove the points that Shanna and I are making.

Islam does a pretty good job of representing itself.
There is a little thing we have call free speech which mean we can express our opinion, even if it's contrary to yours.
I Didnt write a word about any ones religion or are you too retarded to process that
Then why did you bring up Jesus and the bible?

First of all, There's no verse in Qur'an says "the age of marriage is 6 or 9 or whatever"
So i wonder From what book did you get this ??
2- I don't think you have read it at all, other wise your review would be more than 3 sentences
3-Have you read this verse before
لا ينهاكم الله عن الذين لم يقاتلوكم في الدين ولم يخرجوكم من دياركم أن تبروهم وتقسطوا إليهم إن الله يحب المقسطين } .
(what is translated to mean):
Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion nor drove you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity. {8:60} Qur'an
إنما ينهاكم الله عن الذين قاتلوكم في الدين وأخرجوكم من دياركم وظاهروا على إخراجكم أن تولوهم ومن يتولهم فأولئك هم }{الظالمون
(what is translated to mean):
it is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to befriend them. and whosoever will befriend them, then such are the zalimun( wrong-doers_ those who disobey Allah.{9:60} Qur'an
___________

Please be fair and at least watch this video and then reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfkjVy...

Thank you for the link Mohammad, when time allows I might check it out if the source is reliable.

You are of course free to believe whatever you want about me. But in all honesty I am getting very tired of this discussion and the accusations that are being thrown against my person, my education and my integrity. Don't expect any follow up comment for the time being.

First of all, There's no verse in Qur'an says "the age of marriage is 6 or 9 or whatever"
But there is this lovely little passage
Divorce 65:4 And for such of your women as despair of menstruation, if ye doubt, their period (of waiting) shall be three months, along with those who have it not.
"With those who have it not" Who of the female sex have had it not LITTLE GIRLS...
Then Sharia does... does sharia derive from islam or islam from sharia

The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.



Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.



Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."



Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').



Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.



Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"



Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."



Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).



Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?



Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"



Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.



Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."



Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:293, also). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."



Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."



Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."



Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."



Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam. Prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars.



Quran (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."



Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The "striving" spoken of here is Jihad (Arabic).

The Quran part 2

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.




Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"



Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.



Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).




Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that they are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.



Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."




Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme."



Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."



Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).



Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)



Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"



Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.



Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.



Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle. The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."



Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"



Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.



Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.



Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist."



Quran (61:10-12) - "O ye who believe! Shall I lead you to a bargain that will save you from a grievous Penalty?- That ye believe in Allah and His Messenger, and that ye strive (your utmost) in the Cause of Allah, with your property and your persons: That will be best for you, if ye but knew! He will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Gardens of Eternity." This verse was given in battle. It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.



Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

From the Hadith:



Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."



Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.



Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'



Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)



Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious



Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah



Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."



Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."



Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."



Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"



Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihid died the death of a hypocrite.'"



Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."



Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them.



Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.



Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.



Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.



Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 327: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”



Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: - Lest anyone think that cutting off someone's head while screaming 'Allah Akbar!' is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.



Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.


Still want to argue that justice and kindness are not forbidden?

Rita wrote: "Thank you for the link Mohammad, when time allows I might check it out if the source is reliable.

You are of course free to believe whatever you want about me. But in all honesty I am getting very..."

Rita don't be disheartened :)

You're welcome ....But I would remind that the point of that video is to say cultures through time and places are different...what you may see as wrong today in your country may be considered right and legal in another place and another time..

For the attack on your person.......I'm truly sorry about that.....but as you know every action has a reaction...you can't through what would be considered as a humiliation to 1.2 billion people following the teachings and laws found in that book and they Never commit or found within that book what would even imply such crimes(abusing women, child sex and killing non-Muslims)which are awful accusations by the way....
and expect them to welcome it..
We never had sex even with adults before marriage
It's only marriage....
Me or my father or my grandfathers never abused our wives and if there's any around us it's the natural percentage found in any community not because of the teachings of Qur'an
And for killing non-Muslims....I think you have to just visit a Muslim country and see for your self how many non-Muslims are their and ask why they are still alive all these centuries having their own worshiping buildings everywhere in these countries

Thank you...

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/...

Please be fair and at least watch this video and then reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfkjVy...
So your argument is not that the child marriage didn't happen but that it was OK, so if it was ok then why not now? Especially as the Prophet, the very man a good muslim must strive to emulate had one? Is moral or is it not? If Allah proclaimed Ok for Mohammad and his contemporaries why is it not now, did he make another revelation?
The false equivalency of comparing the child marriage of Mohammad to the various christian and jewish rulers is that these rulers are not prophets, not held up as worthy of emulation, and while I doubt many would approve of them either, you must acknowledge the difference.

Oh Shana sorry I did not see your comment until now
You gave me a huge number of verses in English so it's taking me a while to get it and to know it's origin
So I'll try to reply as much as i can
now...you are mixing facts together and missing the main point of that video
what was acceptable before may be is not acceptable now
and these are not isolated cases .......no.it was normal.
For almost how many centuries no one have ever talked about marriage of young aged females except now (when it's become unacceptable for the "modern" people)
and you better see the age of consent history through these countries from that link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_c...

Oh no....7 .......9....3 years old??!!!
Then it was good and nice
but now they are barbarians ??!!

oh yeah......and marriage is wrong of young females an not civilized
but close-in-age sexual relations are acceptable .....13-12-11 years old ...oh yeah that's comforting really.....this is civilization right??

then Your Question Why ""not now??""
Tell me something do you know the reason why did Prophet Muhammad refused to marry his daughter to his best friend and companion AbuBaker??
Do what did he say to him??

Shanna wrote: Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.
."

I think again you're mixing tings up and you're speaking as if you know something but let me tell you..you need to read a lot and empty your cup so can fill it again...so please stop copying and pasting
Actually they did not relocate in Medina because the weather there was better....but because of the torture and persecution they suffered there ...they took their money houses and...
i'll continue later ...i have to go now

And the end of it they wanted to kill The prophet
but he managed to escape
So because you have another refugee you have to give up your rights...
Do not fight for your rights and if you do please fight them back with roses
And did what later???
I think you missed so many situations here
like "whoever entered his house is safe etc."
and who did say to the Meccans "go you are free"
and "one of the Meccans you said they drove them out
later his son became Ruler of the whole nation??
(your information is mixed, missing , inaccurate and needs a lot of verifications)
And now you know the difference between Arabic words
or it's meaning and synonyms ???
Itihad is not used in Qur'an ...and fitna or فتنة
is always used and if want to know it's meaning
here it's(my own translation to the meaning)
It means to persecute some body and torture him to make him give up his belief which is stronger than itihad because itihad may be for ethnic group or a religion group (so how you'll make them gave up their origins?)
And here's a bit of information
Qur'an is only in Arabic and there's no direct translation for it....it's only explanation of the meaning so i can not in my prayers for example read these verse in English
the text is only in arabic
so you better not read these brief meaning translations and read a translation for a book explaining Qur'an

By the way
1- We can use our laws to limit some allowed things (like age of marriage, certain types of foods, ....etc.) according to the circumstances but we can not allow forbidden things by religion by making laws (like sexual relations outside marriage ....alcohol..etc.)
2- Please read by your self, stop canned and ready-made opinions and reviews,and please stop copy and pasting

I can reply to what ever you have mentioned one by one
but this would be ridiculous as it all have the same problem

Your problems (or your resource) are
1-Cutting out texts so it looks faulty
(Like what you can do for example with the main sentence of Islam "Shahada" :"There's no god but ALLAH", you can cut it down into "There's no god" to serve your purpose which is just attacking Islam)

2-Cutting texts out of context or altering the context so it will fit your goals
Like what you did in "drove them out" lie as no one have been killed or "DROVE OUT" of Mecca and more

Or the ultimate deceit in a Machiavellian way Shanna wrote: "Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle."
Yes my lady in which situation?? an where the rest of the verse??
let me give the WHOLE verse which you have cut it out
إِذْ يُوحِي رَبُّكَ إِلَى الْمَلَائِكَةِ أَنِّي مَعَكُمْ فَثَبِّتُوا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا ۚ سَأُلْقِي فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا الرُّعْبَ فَاضْرِبُوا فَوْقَ الْأَعْنَاقِ وَاضْرِبُوا مِنْهُمْ كُلَّ بَنَانٍ

[Mohsin Khan] (Remember) when your Lord revealed to the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes."

Oh no...and where is that in the middle of a battlefield .....So he should tell them "give them a hug and kiss them good bye saying take care of your self"???
and almost in each "Aya" or verse as you call it...you have done the same.

3-Again translating meaning of Arabic words as you may like so it will look as you want "like Fitna word" which it's meaning is well known to native Arabic speakers
But how they know their language?? I know it better
If I give 3 words to give me the difference between them you wouldn't know
For example (Fitna, Faten, Fataan فتنة فاتن فتان)
or These (Kest, Kast قسط و قاسط)

4-Consealing other Verses and Hadiths that will give the whole picture of how Qur'an deals with "war, peace, non-Muslims"
Just for example

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

"If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds. (The Noble Quran, 5:28)"

"God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. (The Noble Quran, 60:8)"

"And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers. (The Noble Quran 2:193)"

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. (The Noble Quran, 2:256)"

"Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God's will) in Islam. Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them). (The Noble Quran, 15:2-3)"

"Say, 'The truth is from your Lord': Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it):......(The Noble Quran, 18:29)"

"If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then COMPEL mankind, against their will, to believe! (The Noble Quran, 10:99)"

"Say: 'Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message). (The Noble Quran, 24:54)"

"Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (The Noble Quran, 109:1-6)"

and more and more...........

Are you suggesting that the only way to approach this is to copy the quran in it's entirety and discuss word by word, insanity, the fact is that while some claim islam is the religion of peace there are passages that justify and call for violence.
Also for every passage you can produce that calls for so called peace or moderation or whatever I can produce one for violence and general nastiness, that being said this is also true of all the abrahamic holy texts. Just like you cherry pick the good bits, I cherry pick the bad bits.
I think actions speak louder than words and there are clearly some muslims (and christians and jews) who are violent because they feel entitled to by a book and justifiably so, by the terms of the book. This alone is enought to condemn religions.
"Machiavellian" nice rhetoric but how does the rest of the passage 8:12 mitigate a call to violence.

Shanna wrote: "Are you suggesting that the only way to approach this is to coppy the quran in it's entirety and discuss word by word, insanity"

No Ma'am , I'm suggesting to read the translation of the "tafseer" (explanation) books explaining the Meaning of Qur'an , not the direct translation because there's none.....It's just a trial to give you a near meaning as it's almost impossible to translate all the words without loosing it's meaning (like what happened to the Bible)
Also I suggest that you read by yourself and judge yourself not reading some biased article somewhere then copying and pasting it every where as if you got it all

Shanna wrote: "the fact is that while some claim islam is the religion of peace there are passages that justify and call for violence"

OK ..
Do you want to establish a country or a nation without regulating military and defense issues??
Please do not speak in generalized words
There's unreasonable peace and reasonable one
Can the US or your own country Australia suddenly say "oh we are a peaceful country and so we will have no army any more and no police forces any more and we will never participate in any military actions any more Because we are PEACEful people"
Insanity, right.
Islam teaches us how to live...how to deal with every aspect in our lives ...how to work...how to deal with our families..neighbors (Muslims and non-Muslims)...how to marry ... how to fight....how to have peace...how to watch out for every action your doing because you will be judged for that one-day
It's a full system capable of dealing with each aspect of life solving its problems, and at the same time balanced between spirituality and reality

Shanna wrote: ""Machiavellian" nice rhetoric but how does the rest of the passage 8:12 mitigate a call to violence. "

Really?? I'm really shocked
At least little apology Shanna for altering and cutting the text and taking it out of context!!!
And you are suggesting that to tell them on battlefield when they meet the enemy "spank them hard and say to them don't do that again bad boys"??
This is war...this is battle...So i think in your country they teach the soldiers when they meet the enemy ...just shoot in the air but don't shoot them...be kind and merciful!!!!!What?!!!!!!!!

Welcome to the land of reality.

I'd like to say somethin, firstly, Quran didn't mention AISHA'S AGE.also we have an suspicions speech related to our prophet mohammed(peace & bliess be upon'm ) So don believe such thing directly ..

'Bout the legitimise violence against women,would you sister please gimme an example from what yovva read.. IN SHA ALAH i'd reply you ... at last to sum up.. i'd say that I'm muslim ? 'n i've read the holy Quran,'n the Holy Quran told me to respect all the religions,except religions which plan to destroy & stop spreading our religion .. tht's what the holy Quran says.. believe me rita . Quran ain't book that gives rumors,lies or try to grew hates,yet It totally the opposite

that can answer http://tube.manhag.net/watch_video.ph...