If you ask being forceful against the disbelievers?
Islam is very hard to save faith. Because there will not be any new revelation after Islam. Christians faith is mixed up with polythesit a bit even they claim to believe in one God. That is very important. During times of Muhammad Pagans were used to try revoke faith by swords(force). So believers with Muhammad were hard against those unbelievers to keep faith. If you say Muhammad should preach in peaceful way? Already Muhammad was used to behave in that way. But when unbelievers attacked faith then prophet had god permission from God to resist.
And God do not love unbelievers. That is true. The point is that. God love His creatures as they being art of God. All unbelievers are art of God so God love them. But God do not love evil deeds of unbelievers. The most evil thing is rejection of God. So God do not love evil acts of unbelievers. God do not love act of lie. God do not love act of persecution. etc. But you mean as if Islam promote a hateful God! That is not true. God sent people on the world to exam if we do evil or good. Can you say God love our evil deeds? For instance if I persecute someone of your family and let’s assume that God will love that. So will you love God yet?
You pick up verse and apply it for all situations! But there are other verses which restrict of that verse. For instance Qur’an say if you kill a man without a reason it is as if you had killed all humanbeing? And if someone kill a human without a reason so God will not forgive that persecution for ever. So f a Muslim kill an unbeliever without a reason so God will not forgive that Muslim. If you read the next of verses you can see that.
There are more but anyway…
Muhammad ( 570–632 ) was born in Mecca and was a traveling merchant until age 40. From 610–622 he had a ministry in Mecca as a prophet of allah. In 622, he fled from his enemies in Mecca and led his followers to Medina. Through tribal political alliances, muhammad soon became the ruler of Medina. He ruled Medina until his death (622–632).
Muhammad as ruler of Medina had a strikingly different character than when he was the prophet of Mecca. The quranic verses he penned in Mecca often contradict the verses he wrote in Medina. Let us compare the two muhammads and the two qurans.
In Mecca, Muhammad preached and exhorted people to submit to Islam. In Medina, he used the threat of the sword to compel people to convert to Islam. In Mecca, muhammad led the life of a teacher and prophet and followed disciplines of prayer, fasting, and worship. In Medina, he was the political ruler and the military commander. During his ten years in Medina, he personally led 27 military attacks. Prior to his death, he conquered most of the Arabian peninsula.
Why would an army use “self-defense” when attacking other community or city? Especially during the rapid expansion of the muslim conquest?
I do not believe in allah or muhammad as being a “prophet” …nor do I believe in the quran as being divine( I do not many disrespect. I am sorry if that’s how it sounds. Its my belief )
Since I do not believe or practice in islam or allah , am I evil?
You say “God love His creatures as they being art of God” Wording it like that sounds like allah is like an art collector…only loves his marble sculptures.
You made an contradiction is a statement you made…
“And God do not love unbelievers. That is true. The point is that. God love His creatures as they being art of God. All unbelievers are art of God so God love them.”
It is quite apparent that “Whoever kills a person….it is as though he killed all mankind” is completely misleading and dishonest and is intended as a dissimulation. It is as though it is saying that allah disapproves of killing (of any kind) “whoever kills… is killing mankind.” It is misleading because it is out of context and because when the verse is read in full it implies that “when the person is a murderer, or someone who inciting sedition,” that killing him is justified. And in the eyes of muslims, all non-muslims who reject allah and islam are “spreading corruption” and are legitimate targets to be killed. But it does imply (to muslims) that killing another (innocent) muslim would be synonymous to killing all mankind.
On the surface of it, the first sentence (islamists often quote only the first sentence, conveniently hiding the next sentence) of verse 5:32 seems very munificence and non-violent. What does the next sentence say? It says clearly that even when allah sent His messengers many people disbelieved them. muhammad was one of such messengers, the best and the last. Therefore, “those who disbelieve in muhammad and allah (i.e. the non-muslims) are the transgressors. Evidently, the non-muslims are the mischief-makers on earth. Logically, these non-muslims do not fall under the purview of the merciful provisions of verse 5:32. In simple language, this means: verse 5:32 is applicable only to the muslims.
