Peace and Love In Quran

[kamsom2009]

For your kind attention please!

I and others believe Jesus (peace be upon him) survived the crucifixion and travelled towards India to continue his ministry among the Lost Tribes of Israel.

His tomb, containing his body, has been recently re-discovered in India where it can be seen to this day.

This belief is not only upheld by the Holy Quran and the Sayings of Holy Prophet, but even by the Holy Bible itself.

Some Books etc at alislam.org/topics/jesus/

Jesus in India
Fountain of Christianity
Christianity: A Journey From Facts to Fiction
Truth About The Crucifixion
Deliverance from the Cross
The Tomb of Jesus
The True Story of Jesus
Where Did Jesus Die?
A Pocket Book of Biblical References
Jesus — Prophet of God
Jesus Son of Mary: Islamic Beliefs
Holy Bible on the Mission of Jesus
Death of Hazrat Jesus
Truth about Revival of Dead
Death and “Ascension” of Hazrat Jesus
Death on the Cross
Jesus in Kashmir
Lost Tribes of Israel
Buddha and Jesus
Lord Krishna and Jesus Christ
The Case of the Missing Messiah
The Muslim Sunrise: Jesus In India (pdf)

 

[elwill]

(Part 1/2)

And where are these hadiths from? I mean what source, who collected them, etc. There are other hadiths I could easily cite (and from sahih hadith sources) which do not fit well with them.

Whoever hurts a dhimmi, hurts me. And whoever hurts me, he annoys God."** (Bukhari)**

“Beware! On the Day of Judgment, I shall myself be the complainant against him who wrongs a dhimmi, or lays on him a responsibility greater than he can bear, or deprives him of anything that belongs to him.” (Al-Mawardi)

and i will respond to you according the hadeeth you cited

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “May Allah’s curse be on the Jews for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” [Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 428]

well , this hadeeth have nothing to do with the ones i cited
i was talking about teaching of islam regarding to our relation with nonmuslims citizen , i’m not talking about judgment of God to them in hearafter

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ismail ibn Abi Hakim that he heard Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz say, “One of the last things that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said was, ‘May Allah fight the Jews and the Christians. They took the graves of their Prophets as places of prostration . Two deens shall not co-exist in the land of the Arabs.’” [Malik Muwatta Book 45, Number 45.5.17; emphasis mine]

the same one

Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah’s Apostle said, “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.” [Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17; emphasis mine]

this hadeeth talking about muslims , it has nothing to do with the ones i cited either
as for i’m talking about our relation with citizen nonmuslims , not about the law’s punishment

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet cursed effeminate men (those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, “Turn them out of your houses .” The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and 'Umar turned out such-and-such woman. [ibid Volume 7, Book 72, Number 774]

it have nothing to do with what i was talking about either , it’s talking about what muslims should to avoid according to islam
curse refere to reaction of God in judgment day , not about our behaviour toward them in this life

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him to go to the narrowest part of it. [Sahih Muslim Book 026, Number 5389]

This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Suhail with the same chain of transmitters but with a slight variation of wording. The hadith transmitted on the authority of Waki’, the words are 'When you meet the Jews." And in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Shu’ba, the words are: 'When you meet the People of the Book." And in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Jarir the words are:" When you meet them," but none amongst the polytheists has been mentioned explicitly by name.

but why ?
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Jews used to greet the Prophet by saying, "As-Samu 'Alaika (i.e., death be upon you), so I understood what they said, and I said to them, “As-Samu 'alaikum wal-la’na (i.e. Death and Allah’s Curse be upon you).” The Prophet said, "Be gentle and calm, O 'Aisha, as Allah likes gentleness in all affairs.
" I said, “O Allah’s Prophet! Didn’t you hear what they said?”
He said, “Didn’t you hear me answering them back by saying, 'Alaikum (i.e., the same be upon you)?”

Volume 9, Book 84, Number 60:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
A Jew passed by Allah’s Apostle and said, “As-Samu 'Alaika.” Allah’s Apostle said in reply, "We 'Alaika./ and upon you " Allah’s Apostle then said to his companions, “Do you know what he (the Jew) has said? He said, 'As-Samu ‘Alaika./ death upon you’” They said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Shall we kill him?” The Prophet, said, “No. When the people of the Book greet you, say: 'Wa ‘Alaikum / and upon you .’”

al slam is very near in hearing to al sam

The Prophet most likely gave the commands to greet everybody at first and then when the problem of Jews coming along saying ‘death upon you’, the Prophet would have had to reverse his judgment.

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning.” [Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 460]

keep us in our point , we are talking about our relation with nonmuslims . we can discuss the issue of marriage in islam in other thread

 

[elwill]

You are only presenting part of the verse.
On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. [S. 5:32; Yusuf Ali; part you left out in bold]

The Koran is talking about rules given to the Jews, not the Muslims. The previous verses discuss the story of Cain and Abel, and indeed this anecdote - “he who saves one life saves the world entire” - was taken from the Talmud, and in fact is quoted at the end of Schindler’s List.

very good point , but what was the purpose from insert it ? is it for muslims to avoid such teaching !

actually , we believe that God revealed the torah to jews , actually we can’t to be muslims if we didn’t believe in the books he revealed , so when God says that he revealed this verse in the torah , so consequently it’s for us either

And again, there is no getting around S. 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. [S. 9:29; Yusuf Ali]

“Even if they are People of the Book” (Jews and Christians) you are to make war with them. Until when? Until they want to make peace? No…“until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” This does not sound very peaceful or loving.

yes it says fight not kill , fight can to means resist or strive hard .
in this verse it talking about who dosn’t submit to the laws of the country . and we can talk about jeziah in another thread

Even more hilarious, in the following verse:

The Jews call 'Uzair [Ezra] a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! [S. 9:30; Yusuf Ali]

Jews do not worship Ezra as the Son of God. Even hadith sources admit that it was only a small group of Jews in Medina who did that. Therefore, Allah is cursing all the Jews (and is apparently asking Muslims to make war against them) for something they don’t even do! Again, where is the peace, love and understanding that we are expected to find? For even if there do exist passages with a smattering of love or understanding, they can only be compared to passages such as these.

it have nothing to do with our subject , let us focus on our subject please
we can discuss that in another thread

 

[elwill]

(Part 2/2)
I brought this up in another thread, but that’s the main problem behind the moral teachings of Islam. It presents this kind of back-handed interpretation of tolerance, where it says intolerance is perfectly fine but it would be “preferred” if tolerance was shown. The problem is once you put that intolerance down for valid use, people are going to use it.

it will be big problem** if **that’s the case in islam

Suppose I were the commander of a military unit, and I’m taking prisoners. I tell my men, “Well, you can kill them if you want, but I’d prefer them alive,” and they go and kill all the prisoners. Am I guilty? Of course I am, because I told them they could kill them if they want. It doesn’t matter if I said I would “prefer” them alive, the fact is I gave the go for the murders to happen.

thank you , you just proofed to me that you don’t know islam
well , explore first in islamic sites about the rules ( and i say rules not teaching ) of dealing with prisoners of wars , then come back with your objections

The teachings of Christ, on the other hand, are very clear:

Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.” [Matt 18:21-22]

“But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” [Matt 5:39]

And behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” [Matt 26:51-52]

“To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either…and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back.” [Luke 6:29-30]

“If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.” [Luke 6:32-35]

If someone strikes you, let them strike you. If someone steals from you, give even more to them. If someone is your enemy and plots evil…love them. Christ never once said “revenge is permitted” or even allowed a hint of evil to be mixed among the good. That would have been a double standard. We are expected to show humility and love to those who have it not, even if they revile and hate us.

very God teaching , jesus (pbuh) is great prophet .
we believe in the same teaching actually

but isn’t their any verses talking about wars and battlefield , you know this kind of enemity !

The Koran, unfortunately, does not teach that. It teaches, as I said, double standards and permits its followers evil when they so desire it. You can make war against your enemies, you can hate your enemies, and you can bring them into a state of submission. If the Koran did indeed come from a spirit, it was not the Spirit of God.

“It may be that Allah will bring about love between you and those of them with whom you are now at enmity… Allah forbids you not respecting those who have not fought against you on account of your religion, and who have not driven you out from your homes, that you be kind to them and deal equitably with them; surely, Allah loves those who are equitable.” - Holy Qur’an, 60:8-9
So the teachings of Islam are very clear. it teaches one to be at peace even with his enemy and to develope love instead of enimity. furthermore, those who are at peace with the Muslims and do not seek to hurt them Allah has commanded us to be nice to them.

let us not forget that there is a duality in the world and double standards exists everywhere. the same can be said of the Christian Crusades that specifically mentioned the ‘killing of infidels (Muslims’ and those who ‘do not believe in Christ’. this was ordered by the then Pope Urban II.

also the Inquisition that was lead was lead and sought the killing of Jews and Muslims at the hands of Christians, and was sanctioned under the church.

what about Communism? Stalin and his brutal dictorship that killed an estimated 30 Million people during his reign?

so you see, there is an unfortunate duality prevalent in the world and no religion from God advocates the killing of innocents, for they are all creatures of the Almighty and one is accountable for his deeds and actions before God.

 

[elwill]

Bump posting for Elwill to reply to B_Wolf’s inquiry. Elwill…See bold font size 3.

hi , jakazaki
thank you for that , sometimes i find myself ver busy , and i missing some of the discussions
by the way , you can send PM to me in such situations , just to be sure that i got it

anyway , i respond to that with according to youe request
if you have further questions , feel wellcome

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

(Part 1/2)

Whoever hurts a dhimmi, hurts me. And whoever hurts me, he annoys God."** (Bukhari)**

“Beware! On the Day of Judgment, I shall myself be the complainant against him who wrongs a dhimmi, or lays on him a responsibility greater than he can bear, or deprives him of anything that belongs to him.” (Al-Mawardi)

And where within those hadiths? (cite the books, passages, numbers etc)

well , this hadeeth have nothing to do with the ones i cited
i was talking about teaching of islam regarding to our relation with nonmuslims citizen , i’m not talking about judgment of God to them in hearafter

Neither was Mohammad - nowhere does it say it’s only in the hereafter, he is speaking of the here and now (the accompanying hadith source where he states two deens shall not exist in Arabia affirms that). And it does have something to do with what you cited, and it’s plain to see that was my intention. You have left out my sentence explaining this, hence it is easy for you to say, “Oh, what’s that got to do with it?” The fact is, you quoted passages relevant to the topic, but didn’t cite them. I responded by saying I can show contradictory statements by Mohammad as well as cite them to show they are legit. So yes, they are quite relevant.

this hadeeth talking about muslims , it has nothing to do with the ones i cited either
as for i’m talking about our relation with citizen nonmuslims , not about the law’s punishment

If a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim, he is to be killed. I must confess I am a little shocked that you accept the execution of a human being based on religious reasons as simply “law’s punishment.” My point here, of course, is to show that contrary to your statement that Mohammad was tolerant towards those of other faiths, he would not even allow his own followers to stay willingly. That is not tolerance. Christians, on the other hand, are asked to educate apostates and try to win them back with love - they are not ordered to kill them. When disciples left Jesus in John 6, He didn’t order them killed.

it have nothing to do with what i was talking about either , it’s talking about what muslims should to avoid according to islam
curse refere to reaction of God in judgment day , not about our behaviour toward them in this life

I’m sorry, but this is an incoherent response to what I quoted. Mohammad curses homosexuals and then orders Muslims to banish them from their homes. Yes, he is talking about behavior towards them in this life. The only way one could have missed this is by willful ignorance.

Furthermore, I am curious as to why you keep saying you were only talking about treatment of non-Muslims. Your original post discussed love for mankind in general, and even talked about love for parents. The OP title and the OP poster’s post which you quote both ask about Islam in regards to general love and peace. Now suddenly you are saying you were only talking about treatment of non-Muslims specifically, and that I am going off-topic.

This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Suhail with the same chain of transmitters but with a slight variation of wording. The hadith transmitted on the authority of Waki’, the words are 'When you meet the Jews." And in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Shu’ba, the words are: 'When you meet the People of the Book." And in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Jarir the words are:" When you meet them," but none amongst the polytheists has been mentioned explicitly by name…

The Prophet most likely gave the commands to greet everybody at first and then when the problem of Jews coming along saying ‘death upon you’, the Prophet would have had to reverse his judgment.

First, I thank you for admitting that Mohammad ordered Muslims to push Jews (or even “People of the Book”) to the side of the road. Second, I thank you for admitting that, because of the actions of some Jews, Mohammad gave a blanket order for Muslims to treat all Jews (or according to you, all People of the Book). None of these are a sign of religious tolerance.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

(Part 2/2)

keep us in our point , we are talking about our relation with nonmuslims . we can discuss the issue of marriage in islam in other thread

I explained my reasoning for showing that: “all in all, this does not sound very loving, understanding, or peaceful.” The topic is peace and love in the Koran, you mention peace and love shown by Mohammad, again by quoting hadith but not citing it. I responded by quoting hadith contrary to your main point. Then again, as we can see above (and soon, below), even when I speak on the subject of treatment of non-Muslims, even that is rejected.

actually , we believe that God revealed the torah to jews , actually we can’t to be muslims if we didn’t believe in the books he revealed , so when God says that he revealed this verse in the torah , so consequently it’s for us either

Then why did Mohammad and his companions instruct Muslims not to read the Koran? Why do Muslims, even Mohammad’s companions, accuse Jews of distorting the Torah? You say you believe in the books he revealed, but then reject them for circular reasons, making them completely irrelevant.

Furthermore, if that order (no killing except “for murder or for spreading mischief in the land”) was sent to the Muslims, then Mohammad added to it himself by saying that Muslims who become non-Muslim can be killed by Muslims. There is no religious tolerance if a person cannot choose their religion.

yes it says fight not kill , fight can to means resist or strive hard .
in this verse it talking about who dosn’t submit to the laws of the country . and we can talk about jeziah in another thread

My friend, you are straining gnats, and twisting the words of your own scripture. Let’s review the passage again, and compare it with what you said:

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. [S. 9:29; Yusuf Ali]

All of Surat 9 is clearly military in theme, there is no getting around this. “Fight” here is therefore clearly speaking about combat (S. 9:25, a few passages earlier, speaks of the battlefields fought by Muslims where Allah brought them victory). You make it sound as if the Muslim is in a debate - but this can only be believed if one ignores the entire context and simply focuses on the word. And it isn’t speaking about those who simply refuse to “submit to the laws of a country,” as it is instructing Muslims to fight until they pay they the jizya - the action is given before the result. They are paying the jizya because they lost the fight, not because they broke a law.

As for your statement “We can talk about jizya in some other thread”…no. I’m sorry, but no. You cannot sit there and say, “Oh, well I’m talking about Islam and non-Muslims, keep on that,” and then when the subject of jizya - which has everything to do with Islam and non-Muslims - comes up, immediately turn around and say, “Oh, uh, let’s talk about that in some other thread sometime.” Again, no.

Jizya is the tax on non-Muslims for no other reason than they belong to another faith. As S. 9:29 says, it is to make them feel “subdued” or “brought low.” I realize Muslims on this forum are common in arguing that it is paying “protection” (as if the tolerant Muslims need money as impedance to protect their non-Muslim citizenry), however, before you argue as such, please respond to this: suppose a western government enacted a tax aimed at Muslims for no other reason other than their being Muslim…would Muslims be OK with that? Would they be OK with the fact that a government made them pay more than non-Muslims simply for their faith? Especially if they specifically said it was to make them feel “subdued” or “brought low”?

Furthermore, is a tax based solely on religious grounds really a sign of religious tolerance? That is a great paradox.

it have nothing to do with our subject , let us focus on our subject please
we can discuss that in another thread

Ah yes the subject…regarding love and peace in Islam? That is the OP title, I believe. Therefore, Allah cursing Jews for something they do not do appears very relevant to that topic. A loving, understanding God does not curse a large group of people for something they don’t even believe in. That would be like a God proclaiming that Christians worship Lucky the Leprechaun as God incarnate and for that they shall be cursed and have war made upon them - again, that is not the sign of peace, love or understanding.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

(Part 3/2) - I missed the last post.

it will be big problem** if **that’s the case in islam

That is a non-answer.

thank you , you just proofed to me that you don’t know islam

That is also a non-answer. Simply telling someone “YOU DON’T KNOW ISLAM!” does not prove them wrong.

very God teaching , jesus (pbuh) is great prophet .
we believe in the same teaching actually

That wasn’t my case, and you have demonstrated that you have ignored the point. The point made is that Christianity teaches love, and no where can Mohammad’s teachings regarding war nor killings be found amongst Christ’s words. In fact, Mohammad’s teachings contradict Christ’s. That was my point - which you avoided entirely.

“It may be that Allah will bring about love between you and those of them with whom you are now at enmity… Allah forbids you not respecting those who have not fought against you on account of your religion, and who have not driven you out from your homes, that you be kind to them and deal equitably with them; surely, Allah loves those who are equitable.” - Holy Qur’an, 60:8-9
So the teachings of Islam are very clear. it teaches one to be at peace even with his enemy and to develope love instead of enimity. furthermore, those who are at peace with the Muslims and do not seek to hurt them Allah has commanded us to be nice to them.

Yes, the earlier verses were like that. The later verses, such as in Surat 9, were different. See my post above.

let us not forget that there is a duality in the world and double standards exists everywhere. the same can be said of the Christian Crusades that specifically mentioned the ‘killing of infidels (Muslims’ and those who ‘do not believe in Christ’. this was ordered by the then Pope Urban II.

also the Inquisition that was lead was lead and sought the killing of Jews and Muslims at the hands of Christians, and was sanctioned under the church.

Ah yes, the non-sequitor logical fallacy.

Of course there’s a big difference between historical leaders who based their claims on religion, and prophets of God who founded the religion in the first place. If you can show me the apostles of Christ acting in a similar fashion as Mohammad and his companions, then we can speak on equal terms.

what about Communism? Stalin and his brutal dictorship that killed an estimated 30 Million people during his reign?

An atheistic government? I do not see the relevancy at all to a discussion involving love and peace in the Koran as compared to love and peace in the teachings of Christ Jesus. In fact, I really really really don’t see the relevancy of naming a system of government that persecuted religion in relation to religion at all.

 

[staffsgt7]

I do not blog or visit any other site/ forum except this CAF. Previously, my activity was mis-directed, against catholics. Now, I hope to help Muslims find their proper way.Thanks.

Thanks for the response.

 

[elwill]

(Part 1/2)
And where within those hadiths? (cite the books, passages, numbers etc)

actually i didn’t find it in internet , may be i need to search
or may be can i search for you about other hadeeth which encourage us to treat nonmuslims with kindness and just , if you think that it dosn’t exist

anyway , we have verses which contains the same teaching toward nonmuslims
for example
in quran
God does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes – from dealing kindly and justly with them. Indeed, God loves those who act justly.

“And dispute you not with the People of the Scripture, except in the best way, unless it be with those who do wrong, but say, ‘We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our God and your God is One; and it is to Him we submit (in Islam).’” (Quran 21:46)

“Do not revile those whom they call upon besides God, lest they revile God out of spite in their ignorance. Thus, We have made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord and He shall then tell them the truth of what they did.” (Quran 6:108)

“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even though it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor, God is a Better Protector to both (than you). So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you avoid justice; and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do.”(Quran 4:135)

The life-story of the Prophet of Islam gives many instances of his kind, tolerant co-existence with non-Muslims. Some of his neighbors were non-Muslims and the Prophet would be generous towards them and exchange gifts. The Prophet of Islam would visit them when they fell sick and do business with them. There was a Jewish family he regularly gave charity to and the Muslims after his death maintained his charity towards them.

Neither was Mohammad - nowhere does it say it’s only in the hereafter, he is speaking of the here and now (the accompanying hadith source where he states two deens shall not exist in Arabia affirms that). And it does have something to do with what you cited, and it’s plain to see that was my intention. You have left out my sentence explaining this, hence it is easy for you to say, “Oh, what’s that got to do with it?” The fact is, you quoted passages relevant to the topic, but didn’t cite them. I responded by saying I can show contradictory statements by Mohammad as well as cite them to show they are legit. So yes, they are quite relevant.

you touched exactly the problem i had . i can’t see contradictions
show me how they contradicts each other

If a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim, he is to be killed. I must confess I am a little shocked that you accept the execution of a human being based on religious reasons as simply “law’s punishment.” My point here, of course, is to show that contrary to your statement that Mohammad was tolerant towards those of other faiths, he would not even allow his own followers to stay willingly. That is not tolerance. Christians, on the other hand, are asked to educate apostates and try to win them back with love - they are not ordered to kill them. When disciples left Jesus in John 6, He didn’t order them killed.

we have to distinguish between apostates issue , and nonmuslims issue
we now are talking about treatment of nonmuslims , not treatment of apostates
as for apostates i never said that i’m in agreement with killing them nor do i believe that mohammed (pbuh) killed any of them , but again it’s another issue

I’m sorry, but this is an incoherent response to what I quoted. Mohammad curses homosexuals and then orders Muslims to banish them from their homes. Yes, he is talking about behavior towards them in this life. The only way one could have missed this is by willful ignorance.

well , he talked about homosexuality for all citizins alike ( muslims and others )
i hope you can see the difference

Furthermore, I am curious as to why you keep saying you were only talking about treatment of non-Muslims. Your original post discussed love for mankind in general, and even talked about love for parents. The OP title and the OP poster’s post which you quote both ask about Islam in regards to general love and peace. Now suddenly you are saying you were only talking about treatment of non-Muslims specifically, and that I am going off-topic.

because you quoted specific hadeeth i cited , then you tried to show me that you knows other hadeeth contradicts it
and those hadeeths was talking about how we should to treat nonmuslims , while your hadeeth are colection of ahadeeth where many of them dosn’t fit the contradictions you tried to proof

First, I thank you for admitting that Mohammad ordered Muslims to push Jews (or even “People of the Book”) to the side of the road. Second, I thank you for admitting that, because of the actions of some Jews, Mohammad gave a blanket order for Muslims to treat all Jews (or according to you, all People of the Book). None of these are a sign of religious tolerance.

i’m soooo sorry if you feel insulted if someone didn’t start the greeting to you .
i hope it will not cause civil wars or something , just be sure that it’s obligation upon muslims to respond to your greeting if you started it

i just told you the situation so that you can understand the reasons ,

 

[staffsgt7]

Here is a good example of what peace and love in the Koran have brought Indonesia.

In 1998, …Muslim soldiers were burning and looting a predominantly Chinese district in Jakarta. Heinously they also were gang raping Chinese women on the street. The ones they didn’t kill they dumped them in the sea alive with large rocks tied to them. Some of them managed to survive to tell the horrific tale. There is an insane asylum in Taiwan where you can find many of these women today. They’ve all lost their minds and their lives completely ruined.

And we see Jihadist activity growing in our country too as it has been happening in Europe and the UK too.

I have read ‘Muslim Mafia’ and know that the effort for Muslims who claim to be peaceful to cooperate with the FBI and CIA is lessening and even hostile against these agencies. This tells me that the peace and love just is not there but a thin veil that is quickly discarded.

 

[elwill]

(Part 2/2)
I explained my reasoning for showing that: “all in all, this does not sound very loving, understanding, or peaceful.” The topic is peace and love in the Koran, you mention peace and love shown by Mohammad, again by quoting hadith but not citing it. I responded by quoting hadith contrary to your main point. Then again, as we can see above (and soon, below), even when I speak on the subject of treatment of non-Muslims, even that is rejected.

sorry it was my fault from the beginning , i should first clarify that love isn’t absolute in islam
in islam , their are punishments for crimers , and offcourse it isn’t love
in islam , their are punishment for those who violate the laws , and offcourse it isn’t love
in islam , their will be hell for disbelievers , and offcourse it isn’t love

is islam love and tolerance ? i think it depend on the person , as for islam show tolerance for some and show violece against the others , but it isn’t based on the religion , it’s based on the deeds

Then why did Mohammad and his companions instruct Muslims not to read the Koran? Why do Muslims, even Mohammad’s companions, accuse Jews of distorting the Torah? You say you believe in the books he revealed, but then reject them for circular reasons, making them completely irrelevant.

what is the deal ?
we believe that allah revealed torah to mosa (pbuh) , and we believe that next generations distorted it then
is that complex to understand !

Furthermore, if that order (no killing except “for murder or for spreading mischief in the land”) was sent to the Muslims, then Mohammad added to it himself by saying that Muslims who become non-Muslim can be killed by Muslims. There is no religious tolerance if a person cannot choose their religion.

apostates , again
please make it in another thread if you wanna to discuss it
quran have nothing against apostates

My friend, you are straining gnats, and twisting the words of your own scripture. Let’s review the passage again, and compare it with what you said:

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. [S. 9:29; Yusuf Ali]

All of Surat 9 is clearly military in theme, there is no getting around this. “Fight” here is therefore clearly speaking about combat (S. 9:25, a few passages earlier, speaks of the battlefields fought by Muslims where Allah brought them victory). You make it sound as if the Muslim is in a debate - but this can only be believed if one ignores the entire context and simply focuses on the word. And it isn’t speaking about those who simply refuse to “submit to the laws of a country,” as it is instructing Muslims to fight until they pay they the jizya - the action is given before the result. **They are paying the jizya because they lost the fight, not because they broke a law. **

your interpretation means that muslims waged this war to collect the jeziah

what is the name of this battle ?

by the way , the focus in words are very important to understand quran , the word and the context and historical background are very important

As for your statement “We can talk about jizya in some other thread”…no. I’m sorry, but no. You cannot sit there and say, “Oh, well I’m talking about Islam and non-Muslims, keep on that,” and then when the subject of jizya - which has everything to do with Islam and non-Muslims - comes up, immediately turn around and say, “Oh, uh, let’s talk about that in some other thread sometime.” Again, no.

i just wanted to focus on main point untill we finish it , i don’t want to make multiple branches from the main subject
each point you raise needs complete threads for itself

Jizya is the tax on non-Muslims for no other reason than they belong to another faith. As S. 9:29 says, it is to make them feel “subdued” or “brought low.” I realize Muslims on this forum are common in arguing that it is paying “protection” (as if the tolerant Muslims need money as impedance to protect their non-Muslim citizenry), however, before you argue as such, please respond to this: suppose a western government enacted a tax aimed at Muslims for no other reason other than their being Muslim…would Muslims be OK with that? Would they be OK with the fact that a government made them pay more than non-Muslims simply for their faith? Especially if they specifically said it was to make them feel “subdued” or “brought low”?

zakaht is the tax (2.5 % annualy ) on muslims for no other reason than the belong to islam , and it’s more than jeziah tax (1.5% annualy ) by the way

Ah yes the subject…regarding love and peace in Islam? That is the OP title, I believe. Therefore, Allah cursing Jews for something they do not do appears very relevant to that topic. A loving, understanding God does not curse a large group of people for something they don’t even believe in. .

is that mean that your God will not curse me if kept my faith in islam because christianity is the massage of love ?

That would be like a God proclaiming that Christians worship Lucky the Leprechaun as God incarnate and for that they shall be cursed and have war made upon them - again, that is not the sign of peace, love or understanding

is that what you think that muslims believe ?

 

[elwill]

(Part 3/2)
That is a non-answer.

just wanna to say that your beliefs about what islam teaches is differe that what really muslims believe

so most of time you will blaming islam for some issues which muslims in the fact dosn’t believe that it’s islamic in the first place

That is also a non-answer. Simply telling someone “YOU DON’T KNOW ISLAM!” does not prove them wrong.

sure

That wasn’t my case, and you have demonstrated that you have ignored the point. The point made is that Christianity teaches love, and no where can Mohammad’s teachings regarding war nor killings be found amongst Christ’s words. In fact, Mohammad’s teachings contradict Christ’s. That was my point - which you avoided entirely.

offcourse , mohammed’s teaching regarding war can’t found amongest christ’s word because he never find himself in such situation , but OT filled with such words and jesus never denied them

Yes, the earlier verses were like that. The later verses, such as in Surat 9, were different. See my post above.

i don’t understand you point

tell me exactly , when this one revealed ,and when the other one revealed , may be i can understand your point then

Ah yes, the non-sequitor logical fallacy.

Of course there’s a big difference between historical leaders who based their claims on religion, and prophets of God who founded the religion in the first place. If you can show me the apostles of Christ acting in a similar fashion as Mohammad and his companions, then we can speak on equal terms.

i have no problem , just find for me comparable situation , then we can speak on equal terms

An atheistic government? I do not see the relevancy at all to a discussion involving love and peace in the Koran as compared to love and peace in the teachings of Christ Jesus. In fact, I really really really don’t see the relevancy of naming a system of government that persecuted religion in relation to religion at all.

just standardise the criteria of comparisons and you will find both of them relative

church for example can’t condemn christians armies in Iraq because they kill their enemy

and church for example can’t condemn those who trying to kill terrorist , as for they should to love them even if they gonna to explode them

and church can’t condemn government for death execution in their laws

and church can’t condemn the governments because it own forces for defence , as for they should to love their enemy and wellcome death without killing anyone and without wars

tell me , are you believe that jesus will condemn you if you participate in wars against terrorism to save your people ?

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

(Part 1/3)

actually i didn’t find it in internet , may be i need to search
or may be can i search for you about other hadeeth which encourage us to treat nonmuslims with kindness and just , if you think that it dosn’t exist

Please do.

anyway , we have verses which contains the same teaching toward nonmuslims

As I already said, those passages were revealed early on when Mohammad had more power than he originally had in Mecca and was in Medina. Once he had taken more power, that policy went bye-bye, and passages such as S. 9:29 were given, and commands such as pushing the Jews off the side of the road were passed.

you touched exactly the problem i had . i can’t see contradictions
show me how they contradicts each other

Are you even reading my posts?

You claimed there’s peace and love in Islam. You quoted hadith, but did not cite them. I said I had hadith that contradicted them by showing there were examples contrary to love and peace in Islam. I quoted and cited them to verify this case. So if you don’t understand where there’s a contradiction, please tell me where is you see love and peace in the following:

• Asking God to curse people.
• Cursing other people of faith, then declaring that there shall not exist two religions in Arabia (which his companions interpreted as meaning make war upon them).
• Kicking homosexuals out of your homes.
• Ordering any one who leaves Islam to be killed.
• Pushing Jews and Christians to the side of the road simply for who they are.
• Saying that angels curse a woman simply because she didn’t please her husband sexually.

Christ stated that it wasn’t what went into a person, it was what came out of a person that defiled him, because it reveals the true nature of his heart (Matt 15:11). Mohammad is a good example of this.

we have to distinguish between apostates issue , and nonmuslims issue
we now are talking about treatment of nonmuslims , not treatment of apostates
as for apostates i never said that i’m in agreement with killing them nor do i believe that mohammed (pbuh) killed any of them , but again it’s another issue

What is an apostate? Someone who leaves their faith. If a Muslim leaves his faith, what does that make him? A non-Muslim. We are also talking about love and peace in Islam - if a religion teaches it’s OK to kill a person solely because they lose the faith…that’s not love nor peace.

And if you’re not in agreement with killing them…then you’re in disagreement with your own prophet. It doesn’t matter if Mohammad never killed them (his companions did), because he told Muslims they had the clear to kill them. Are you correcting your own prophet and his companions?

well , he talked about homosexuality for all citizins alike ( muslims and others )

Yes, and he ordered them to be banished from Muslim homes. Again, that is not love and peace. That is intolerance. Christianity condemns homosexuality as a sin, but neither Christ nor the apostles ever told Christians to kick homosexuals out of their homes.

i’m soooo sorry if you feel insulted if someone didn’t start the greeting to you .
i hope it will not cause civil wars or something , just be sure that it’s obligation upon muslims to respond to your greeting if you started it

Your sarcasm betrays your ignorance. I can’t help but notice that oftentimes on this forum, when someone responds to your arguments, you fall back on saying you can’t understand them and then start getting sarcastic and cynical. As Voltaire said, “A witty saying proves nothing.”

Now, I have no problem if someone doesn’t greet me. Where I have an issue is when they push me off into the road as they walk by, and solely because I am not of their faith. That is what the hadith clearly says. You confessed to this. Please stop dancing around the points and respond to them.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

(Part 2/3)

sorry it was my fault from the beginning , i should first clarify that love isn’t absolute in islam…is islam love and tolerance ? i think it depend on the person

That was my point with the parable of the officer: inconsistency in morals; what is OK in one situation is not OK in another and vice versa. That was also my point in quoting Christian scripture. Islam plays double-standards and tries to give its followers both ways out - peace and violence. Christ only taught peace - it didn’t matter who the person was. Again, Islam is incompatible with Christ’s teachings because of this, and Islam is, as you yourself admit, not entirely a religion of love, peace and tolerance.

…as for islam show tolerance for some and show violece against the others , but it isn’t based on the religion , it’s based on the deeds

Then why are apostates killed and Muslims given the OK to push Jews and Christians to the side of the road?

what is the deal ?
we believe that allah revealed torah to mosa (pbuh) , and we believe that next generations distorted it then
is that complex to understand !

Complex to understand? No. Self-refuting? Yes. Because you claim that God revealed the Torah to Moses, then claim that later generations distorted it (based on a document and the claim of one man who came centuries later), and then use that book as a source to prove your point and even claim that you believe in it just as Jews do. That is inconsistency. It is also intellectual dishonesty. You can believe the Torah is a revealed book of God, or you can believe that it was distorted and distorted so bad that God had to send later revelation - but you can’t believe both.

apostates , again
please make it in another thread if you wanna to discuss it

Again, stop dancing around the points and avoiding them. If there is love and peace in Islam, why are apostates ordered to be killed?

your interpretation means that muslims waged this war to collect the jeziah

That isn’t at all the context that I am presenting, and I think even the casual reader can discern that. You stated that jizya applies to those “who dosn’t submit to the laws of the country”; I responded by showing that jizya is involved in war, and that it is actually applied to those who lost the war but refused to convert to Islam. Again, that is not religious tolerance.

what is the name of this battle ?

I cited the passage (9:25). It states it there.

i just wanted to focus on main point untill we finish it , i don’t want to make multiple branches from the main subject
each point you raise needs complete threads for itself

If they are part of the main subject, then they are relevant. You have also responded to other points that are part of those “multiple branches,” but haven’t responded to this. Honestly, I think you simply keep saying we should speak about it in another thread because you know if you have to respond to them you’ll be put into a corner. So yes, jizya has to do with non-Muslims, and is relevant to the topic. And yes, we are going to discuss it.

zakaht is the tax (2.5 % annualy ) on muslims for no other reason than the belong to islam , and it’s more than jeziah tax (1.5% annualy ) by the way

Could you please quote a source to prove these numbers?

Furthermore, you seemed to completely ignore everything I wrote after that:

As S. 9:29 says, it is to make them feel “subdued” or “brought low.” I realize Muslims on this forum are common in arguing that it is paying “protection” (as if the tolerant Muslims need money as impedance to protect their non-Muslim citizenry), however, before you argue as such, please respond to this: suppose a western government enacted a tax aimed at Muslims for no other reason other than their being Muslim…would Muslims be OK with that? Would they be OK with the fact that a government made them pay more than non-Muslims simply for their faith? Especially if they specifically said it was to make them feel “subdued” or “brought low”?

Please respond to the question.

is that mean that your God will not curse me if kept my faith in islam because christianity is the massage of love ?

Perhaps this is the grand difference between the God of Christianity and the god of Islam - my Lord does not curse anyone. He loves everyone equally, the bad man and the good man. The “curse” on a person after death is not a reflection of God’s feelings for them, but their feelings for God. The fire coming from the throne of God extends through both paradise and hell, but those in paradise feel joy by it while those in hell feel pain from it. This is because the fire is nothing else but God’s love - those in paradise relish in it, those in hell abhor it. As I said, damnation is not a curse of God, but a curse people bring upon themselves.

But in any case, your question is actually not relevant to what I was saying. I was quoting S. 9:30 and saying that Allah curses people for things they do not believe in. Which brings me to my next point:

is that what you think that muslims believe ?

Of course not. I was simply using a metaphor to show how ludicrous the charge against Jews in the Koran is. Can you confirm to me that Jews as a whole worship Ezra as the Son of God, and therefore are deserving of God’s wrath?

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

(Part 3/3)

That is also a non-answer. Simply telling someone “YOU DON’T KNOW ISLAM!” does not prove them wrong.

So…you admit that you gave a non-argument and were in fact simply dancing around the question?

offcourse , mohammed’s teaching regarding war can’t found amongest christ’s word because he never find himself in such situation , but OT filled with such words and jesus never denied them

You stated the Torah (and most of the OT then) was corrupted. So how can it truly be applicable?

But you cannot say that Christ’s words aren’t similar to Mohammad’s because He was never in that situation. Christ is very clear. I made that case. His apostles are also very clear. Even if you persecuted, beaten, mocked, spit on, and any number of things…you are to love your enemy and let them.

i don’t understand you point

I explained it more above.

i have no problem , just find for me comparable situation , then we can speak on equal terms

I have presented many situations. You have simply said, “I don’t want to talk about that, let’s talk about this topic” over and over again.

Unless, of course, you are speaking of Christ and the apostles…in which case, no, there are no comparable situations, because they never taught their followers to make war, push people off the sidewalk, or that women who don’t pleasure their husbands will be cursed by angels.

just standardise the criteria of comparisons and you will find both of them relative

No, you won’t, because Stalin and communism are completely irrelevant, just as pointing to crusaders.

First, as I said, it is a non-sequitor, saying, “Yeah well A did the same as B, so there!” as if B is excused for the actions of A. Saying, “Well crusaders killed people too!” comes across as if you are arguing, “Yeah there’s violence in the teachings of Islam, so? Other people do violence, that makes it OK.”

Second, again, as I said, quoting the actions of later followers acting simply in the name of their faith is not relevant unless their teachings can be sourced to their belief. Christ and His apostles (let alone the early Church Fathers) would have never condoned the crusades, therefore they are irrelevant. Mohammad and his companions, on the other hand, are seen being intolerant and seen making war against those around them. Again, it is incompatible to compare the unilateral actions of later followers with the founders of a faith.

 

[staffsgt7]

elwill’s responses to Byzantine Wolf tell me that we understand Islam perfectly. First he says that there is no love for the unbelievers (or us non-Muslims), he says that they believe that the Bible is corrupted but fails to provide proof, and if it was corrupted and that Muslims waged war. (They waged war NOT to collect the Jizya, but as Mohammed waged it, to collect loot and slaves and more land for dar al Islam. )

The insistence on the Bible being corrupted is only based on someone who wasn’t a Jew or a Christian but on a pagan who couldn’t read or write. The credibility of the Bible being corrupted isn’t even believable. Yet we now have a Yemeni Koran that shows erasures and complete sentences written over by someone. And then the knowledge that the Koran that we see today had parts of it eaten by animals. The original was destroyed after it was compiled by gathering men together and having them recite from memory. This was done centuries after Mohammed died.

The original people who had the Koran in memory were long dead in their Jihads and it was passed on by word of mouth. How reliable is that? I don’t find it reliable at all considering that individuals interpret things differently and memories are completely dependent on an intact brain. How many of these brains were injured by blunt force on the battle fields waging their offensive wars against peoples? And after reading the Koran I would say that it was written by people who had blunt injuries to their brains!!! It is the most horrible book I have ever read. Allah should be ashamed of himself. Now because I really think it came from Mohammed, it figures that it is so bad.

The unwillingness to discuss things that happen such as the situations that BW has written about, basically how Muslims treat dhimmi which is the opposite of love and tolerance. The treatment of dhimmi follow along how the Sharia laws say to treat them. And since Sharia laws are based on the Koran, I don’t know who the inability to want to discuss them. Why is it that Sharia laws didn’t pay attention to all those abrogated verses that the Muslims give us to try to prove that Islam is all peace and love?

Love and tolerance is usually applied Muslim to Muslim. But we don’t really see that because Muslims kill more Muslims in Muslim majority areas and lands. The crimes even in our Western nations are a one way street too of Muslim on non-Muslim. The crimes of rape, assaults and in some countries of kidnappings are of Muslim against non-Muslim. In our lands we get Jihadist attacks against us and no one is doing that to Muslims. They certainly start raising their voices that they are the victims after such attacks and they have been proven baseless.

 

[staffsgt7]

(Part 3/3)

No, you won’t, because Stalin and communism are completely irrelevant, just as pointing to crusaders.

First, as I said, it is a non-sequitor, saying, “Yeah well A did the same as B, so there!” as if B is excused for the actions of A. Saying, “Well crusaders killed people too!” comes across as if you are arguing, “Yeah there’s violence in the teachings of Islam, so? Other people do violence, that makes it OK.”

Second, again, as I said, quoting the actions of later followers acting simply in the name of their faith is not relevant unless their teachings can be sourced to their belief. Christ and His apostles (let alone the early Church Fathers) would have never condoned the crusades, therefore they are irrelevant. Mohammad and his companions, on the other hand, are seen being intolerant and seen making war against those around them. Again, it is incompatible to compare the unilateral actions of later followers with the founders of a faith.

Since the Crusades happened centuries after Mohammed waged all his offensive battles and after his followers carried on his legacy, the Crusades cannot even be used as an excuse of why Muslims waged wars.

Even if they want to use the people of Mecca as an excuse for why Mohammed started his wars they cannot be used as an excuse as to why Mohammed continually attacked caravans. He routinely attacked poorly armed caravans for their loot and for the women and children to be slaves.

These were open acts of aggression that have no basis on anything. No excuse of what anyone else did at the time can be used other than Mohammed being a murdering thug who was greedy and wanted more women and children for his sexual perversiions.

Funny that none of his sexually perverse verses were abrogated.

 

[staffsgt7]

I can feel all the love once again. Once again more crimes against non-Muslims in Western lands and the numbers of these grow while all we get is lip service that Islam is all about peace and love.

I will repeat this often, when we see the Muslims stopping their crimes against people just because they are non-Muslims will I startto believe that Islam is about peace and love. Until then they have their prophet and their texts to back up the growing carnage. And until then the others who claim to be moderates have their prophet telling them to deceive us.

 

[dzheremi]

Where is the Islamic/religious motive in this shooting, Sgt? Did I miss something? The story points only to a “domestic”, personal motive, mainly this guy’s problems with his ex-girlfriend.