Ephesians 6:12 and fighting extremists

I did not write what Trump should do. I think he knows there is a problem, and he is using extreme measures to fight it....physically. The fight and the war is spiritual and you of all people should know this.

I don't remember the mafia playing cowboys and Indians.

Countless Americans are spreading all over the land. The beaver is dead on the road. Deer lay in the median. This is what happens when the population starts exploding and there is nowhere else to go. America was bound to be trampled under foot when Europe found it. Native Americans' families weren't killed by the Mafia.

ALL I hear lately are complaints. I do not agree with killing innocent women and children. You know that, also. This was not placed in the political forum. This is about spiritual things. Don't make it political, please.
You know if we discuss the morality of political decisions nothing is black and white and ideas/orders become spectrums of good and evil. And as a christian, I would say we are not fighting refugees from countries but refugees of people from their own religion. For people who don't believe Jesus was God or that there is a God at all. Trump is an idiot who is making orders that are obviously inapplicable to everybody else and that's not fair. For the christian, it's unethical as well to a point. That point being where verses in the bible clash and verses in the qu'ran. That religion is preaching peace in regards to being morality being universal ALWAYS with no exceptions.
Couldn’t agree with you more.
Now greed is good...poor is bad.
It’s okay to hate and mistreat so long as they aren’t a “Christian" too.
 
Last edited:
I'm a Christian, but I wasn't always, and I understand many of the arguments against it. I'm also more of a perennial philosopher. Because of that, there are many Christians that would say I am a bad Christian or not a true Christian. I welcome that criticism with open arms.

The problem with engaging in spiritual warfare with other groups is that many of us are spiritually ignorant. The real spiritual battle is within. Once the battle is won for our own hearts and minds, then and only then should we engage in spiritual warfare outside of ourselves. Why? Because then we know what the hell we are talking about, we know what we are doing, we understand how not to cause more harm and compound the problem. More importantly we know God is calling the shots, not us. As it is, many people take in the Bible as data and regurgitate it as data without truly knowing. (That's not directed at anyone on this forum, it just a generalization) Every day is a spiritual battle within, and with others. The opportunities to plant the seed of love in everyday life are endless. And it's a slow, never ending process...it takes time for seeds to grow. Generations, lifetimes even.

It is my opinion that our current approach to fighting extremism/terrorism is making matters worse. Look at all hatred we dump on entire groups of people and religions. Is that Christ-like? Look at all the civilians that are killed as collateral damage. Is "collateral damage" what happens when we have God in our hearts? If we be still and know God, we know love, we know "peace beyond all understanding" when we act not of our will but of God's, that is, when we know God in our hearts, it is expressed outwardly as compassion, kindness, understanding and love for our brothers and sisters. It is an automatic selflessness to benefit others. Not just to do no harm, but to heal.

When we close our borders, point our fingers, judge, hate, seek vengeance, divide and kill we are not acting in love but fear. Spiritual warfare without love is just war.

When we act in fear and seek to protect what is "ours" through violent retaliation we are doing more harm than good. By rejecting refugees, hating Islam, and killing civilians we are not protecting ourselves and eliminating a threat. We are creating a bigger and stronger enemy with deeper roots. When we kill a child's parents we plant a seed of hate in that child. When we kill a child the parents want revenge. When we turn away people seeking safety we plant seeds of resentment. When we spew hateful ignorance at people that look different and practice a different religion we are only making ourselves their enemy.

I believe that in fighting this spiritual battle with extremism we need to look deeper than we currently are. What we tend to focus on is the obvious. People are brutally killing other people. That's bad. They are doing this because of Islam. Islam's bad. And we stop there and we go to war with people of Islam. But if we look a little deeper we may see the economic struggles of the people, we may notice the lack of education, poor living conditions, shortages of food, unemployment, any number of things that contributes do a shitty quality of life. The terrorists promise to fill those voids in this life and after.

While we're dropping bombs on the land and ignoring the root cause, we're making matters worse and ensuring this battle will last quite a bit longer. We're wasting money, resources, lives all while strengthening the enemy. Spiritual warfare steeped in ignorance is just war.

I am of the opinion that love is the answer. God is the answer. What would that look like? To me, it is providing a safe place within our borders so that the people fleeing can start anew. It is acceptance of those people and their religion, so they feel welcome here rather than rejected. It is an understanding that we are dealing with human beings just like us with the same needs. It is helping the people that live in "terrorist hotbeds" attain the basic needs for life, an education and potential for employment.

How do we defeat the idea that we are the enemy? By not being one.

Spiritual warfare: We're doing it wrong.

(^think I'm gonna turn those into bumper stickers)
So would it be safe to say that these people are refugees of their own religion rather than their own country or vice versa?
And what do you think about verses in the Qur'an that say it's okay to kill people who don't believe like you? How can you say that Americans will be safe if muslims are following the Qur'an?
Christians are the ones preaching love and practice of turning the cheek. Through the sacrifice of Christ we are left with loving our neighbor as ourself.
 
Could that be partially because there are no true spiritual leaders in today's world?

No because hardly anybody believes anything is supernatural besides anything formally nice like everybody goes to heaven when they die.
 
We don't all see the Spirit of God as supernatural. To be spiritually minded is life. Many people discern life as meaning something natural. Humanity has become a first person subject. What we see, we see with eyes given to us. We understand it with minds given to us. Some react with praise and thanksgiving; others, with jokes and laughter. It is, after all, about what He did and not that of our own selves........third person.

Proverbs 23:9King James Version (KJV)
9 Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of thy words.
 
http://nypost.com/2017/02/11/how-obama-is-scheming-to-sabotage-trumps-presidency/

Once we know who the rulers of the darkness of this world are, we can at least know one of who we are fighting against and why. This man and his "people" are doing more against America right now than most terrorists could do. I would be thrown under the jail for what these people are actively teaching and doing.

This is political. Calling people with differing ideas than yours, "the darkness" does not make it spiritual warfare.

So would it be safe to say that these people are refugees of their own religion rather than their own country or vice versa?

No. It is not safe to say that. Islam is not the enemy.

And what do you think about verses in the Qur'an that say it's okay to kill people who don't believe like you?

I think with the right historical context (and any context in general) the verses make sense. It was a time of war. The verses of violence are not meant for all those that do not believe like them. They are meant for the meccans who waged war on Mohammad and his followers.

Just like the Bible, the Qur'an can be misinterpreted and taken out of context. Such is the case with terrorism where they use it to advance an agenda, and such is the case with a majority of the information we hear vomited from our politicians mouths and on TV/internet.

How can you say that Americans will be safe if muslims are following the Qur'an

Because fear is not in the language of love. Because all the we hear about Islam in America is about the perversions of the extremists. Because the "information" we receive plays to our fear and fear is the devils fart.

Christians are the ones preaching love

How beautiful the world would be if they practiced it too.
 
IS ISLAM A “RELIGION OF THE SWORD”?
Kabir Helminski and Hesham Hessaboula

There are a number of verses in the Qur’an that appear to call for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, and these verses have been too often quoted out of context with what appears to be a willful disregard of the context in which they occur. Among these—and perhaps the most often cited—is the infamous “Verse of the Sword”: “Kill the mushrikeen[1] (those Meccans who had declared war against Muhammad and his community) wherever you find them, and capture them, and blockade them, and watch for them at every lookout…”(9:5). On the surface, this verse would seem to bolster the claim that Islam advocates violence against non-Muslims. There is much more to this story, however. This verse, and the others like it in the Qur’an, have a linguistic, historical, and textual context. Understanding that context is essential in understanding the message of the verse. Careful and unbiased study of these verses, in their proper context, will reveal that the exhortations to fight “idolators” and “unbelievers” are specific in nature and are not general injunctions for the murder of all those who refuse to accept Islam as their way of life. We must remember the challenging historical circumstances of these Qur’anic verses. As is known from the Prophet’s biography, the Meccan oligarchy fought against the Prophet’s message from the very beginning. It resorted to violent repression and torture of the Prophet and his followers when they realized that the flow of converts to Islam was increasing. The Prophet himself survived several assassination attempts, and it became so dangerous for the Muslims in Mecca that the Prophet sent some of his companions to take asylum in the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia. After thirteen years of violence, Muhammad was compelled to take refuge in the city of Medina, and even then the Meccans did not relent in their hostilities. Later, furthermore, various hostile Arab tribes joined in the fight against the Muslims, culminating in the Battle of the Trench, when 10,000 soldiers from many Arab tribes gathered to wipe out the Muslim community once and for all. As we know, the Muslims survived these challenges and eventually went on to establish a vast civilization.

At the time Verse 9:5 was revealed, Mecca had been conquered, the Meccans themselves had become Muslims, and many of the surrounding pagan Arab tribes had also accepted Islam and sent delegations to the Prophet pledging their allegiance to him. Those that did not become Muslim were the bitterest of enemies, and it was against these remaining hostile forces that the verse commands the Prophet to fight. It was in this violent context that the “Verse of the Sword” was revealed. This verse is part of a long chapter entitled “Repentance,” and it was revealed nine years after the Prophet immigrated to Medina.

Yet, verse 9:5 must never be quoted out of context. The verses immediately before and after it explain why verse 9:5 exhorts the believers to “kill idolaters wherever you find them.” The first verses state: “There is immunity from God and the messenger of God for those polytheists (mushrikeen) with whom you have made treaties; So travel the earth for four months, and know that you cannot elude God, and that it is God who brings disgrace upon all who refuse to acknowledge the truth” (9:1-2). The polytheists in these verses are those pagan Arabs who have deliberately broken the treaties they forged with the Prophet. How do we know this? Verse 4 continues: “Except those polytheists with whom you have made a treaty and who have not failed you in anything and have not helped anyone against you; fulfill your treaties with them to the end of their term, for God loves the conscientious.” Had we only quoted only 9:1-2, without the qualifying verse 9:4, it would seem that the Qur’an invalidates all non-aggression treaties made with the non-Muslims so that they can be “slaughtered” according to 9:5. That is clearly not the case. Those who want to malign Islam quote only 9:1-2 and neglect to mention 9:4.

Now, in its proper context, verse 9:5 can be properly understood. Most who quote 9:5 do so incompletely. The full verse reads: “But when the sacred months are past, then kill idolaters wherever you find them, and capture them, and blockade them, and watch for them at every lookout. But if they repent and practice prayer and give alms, then let them go their way; for God is most forgiving, most merciful.” This was a specific command to the Prophet at that specific time to fight those idolaters who were fighting the Muslims; those idolaters who, as 9:4 mentioned, failed in their treaty obligations and helped others fight against the Muslims. It is not a general command to attack all non-Muslims, and it has never signified this to the overwhelming majority of Muslims throughout history. Had it been so, then every year, after the “forbidden months are past,” history would have witnessed Muslims attacking every non-Muslim in sight. The “forbidden months” are four months out of the year during which fighting is not allowed. Three of them occur in a row: the eleventh, twelfth, and first month of the Islamic calendar. This yearly slaughter never occurred. In addition, if one reads on in the ninth chapter, the Qur’an further explains why 9:5 commands the Prophet to “kill idolaters wherever you find them”: “How, when if they get the better of you they do not respect either blood relations or treaty with you? They satisfy you with their words, but their hearts are averse, and most of them are dissolute” (9:8). Further along the Qur’an declares: “Will you not fight people who broke their oaths and planned to exile the messenger, and they took the initiative the first time? Do you fear them? God is more worthy of your fear, if you are believers” (9:13). These pagan tribes, as the Qur’an clearly states, would not hesitate in the least to attack and kill the Muslims at their first chance, and thus they must be fought against. Furthermore, if 9:5 was a general exhortation to kill all non-Muslims, then verse 9:6 would make no sense: “And if one of the polytheists asks you for protection, then protect him, until he hears the word of God: then deliver him to a place safe for him. That is because they are people who do not know.” Yet, verse 9:6 does make sense because the command to “kill idolaters wherever you find them” refers solely to those who are in active hostility to the Muslims. Had verse 9:5 been an open invitation to kill all non-Muslims, it would have been more convenient for the verse to be revealed as soon as the Prophet arrived as leader in Medina, with an army of believers ready to fight to the death for him. Yet, as I previously mentioned, the verse was revealed nine years after the Prophet came to Medina.

Another set of verses seemingly declares that all non-believers are to be attacked and killed: “And let them not think—those who are bent on denying the truth [i.e., unbelievers]—that they shall escape [God]: behold, they can never frustrate [His purpose]. Hence, make ready against them whatever force and war mounts you are able to muster, so that you might deter thereby the enemies of God, who are your enemies as well, and others besides them of whom you may be unaware, but of whom God is aware; and whatever you may expend in God’s cause shall be repaid to you in full, and you shall not be wronged” (8:59-60). Once again, the textual context must be examined. These two verses refer to those who are in active hostility against the Muslim community. An examination of the verses that come before these elucidates this point: “As for those with whom you have made a covenant, and who thereupon break their covenant on every occasion, not being conscious of God—if you find them at war [with you], make of them a fearsome example for those who follow them, so that they might take it to heart; or, if you have reason to fear treachery from people [with whom you hast made a covenant], cast it back at them in an equitable manner: for, verily, God does not love the treacherous!” (8:56-59). When read together, it is clear that 8:59-60 speak of those unbelievers who actively fight against the Muslims and break their covenants “every time.” Again, there is no general exhortation to fight and kill all non-Muslims.

In yet another set of verses, the Qur’an tells the believers to kill non-believers not once, but twice: “…seize them and slay them wherever you may find them” (4:89) and “…seize them and slay them whenever you come upon them: for it is against these that We have clearly empowered you [to make war]” (4:91). We deliberately quoted these two verses out of context to illustrate how deceitful and misleading such a practice is. Again, once the verses are understood in context, it is quite clear that theses verses tell the Muslims to fight only those who fight them. First of all, theses verses are part of a slightly longer passage that begins thusly: “How, then, could you be of two minds about the hypocrites, seeing that God has disowned them because of their guilt? Do you, perchance, seek to guide those whom God has let go astray—when for him whom God lets go astray you can never find any way?” (4:88) The verse speaks of the “hypocrites,” which begs the question of who these “hypocrites” are. They are those Muslims who feigned outward acceptance of Islam, but secretly worked for the destruction of the Muslims. They constantly acted as a fifth column within the Muslim community in Medina. Chief among them, as we discussed earlier, was Abdullah ibn Ubay. This man worked continually to harm the Muslims. For example, on the way to the mountain of Uhud, where the second battle against the pagans in Mecca took place, Abdullah ibn Ubay told his followers to go back home because he did not think a battle was going to be waged. His followers, and some true believing Muslims, obeyed him, and the Muslim army was cut by two-thirds, from 1000 men to approximately 300. During this battle, the Prophet was severely wounded and was nearly killed by the Meccans.

Yet, despite their treachery, verses 4:89 and 4:91 do not call on the Prophet to “kill them all,” but only those who are in open hostility to him: “They [the hypocrites] would love to see you deny the truth even as they have denied it, so that you should be like them. Do not, therefore, take them for your allies until they forsake the domain of evil for the sake of God; and if they revert to open enmity, seize them and slay them wherever you may find them. And do not take any of them for your ally or giver of succor” (4:89) [emphasis added]. Furthermore, 4:90 explains that if these hypocrites do not fight the Muslims, they are not to be harmed: “Unless it be those that have ties with people to whom you yourselves are bound by a covenant, or such as come to you because their hearts shrink from [the thought of] making war either on you or on their own folk… Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, God does not allow you to harm them.”

The same is true for the following verse 4:91: “You will find others who would like to be safe from you as well as from their own folk, but who, whenever they are faced anew with temptation to evil, plunge into it headlong. Hence, if they do not let you be, and do not offer you peace, and do not stay their hands, seize them and slay them whenever you come upon them: for it is against these that We have clearly empowered you.” [emphasis added] Yet again, the Qur’an says to fight only those who fight against the Muslims.

It should be quite obvious by now that there is a recurring theme in the above verses: fighting is only in self defense, and it is only against those who fight against the Muslims. Indeed, Islam is a religion that seeks to maximize peace and reconciliation. Yet, Islam is not a pacifist religion; it does accept the premise that, from time to time and as a last resort, arms must be taken up in a just war. If Muslims are fought against, Islam demands that they fight back. Hence, one will find very belligerent verses in the Qur’an, such as the ones I quoted above. But, as we mentioned, these verses exist in a context and are specific in their scope. They are not general exhortations to violence. The Qur’an is quite clear about this. The verses concerning fighting that were revealed soon after the Prophet arrived in Medina are self-defensive in nature: “Victims of aggression are given license [to fight] because they have been done injustice; and God is well able to help them” (22:39). Why was this permission granted? The Qur’an continues: “[They are] those evicted from their homes without reason except that they say, ‘Our Sustainer is God’…” (22:40).

Furthermore, when Muslims do fight in war, all is not “fair,” as it has been said. Islamic Law has always recognized principles of just war. Muslims are strictly forbidden to commit aggression: “And fight for the sake of God those who fight you; but do not be brutal or commit aggression, for God does not love brutal aggression” (2:190). The next verse also says, “slay them wherever you may come upon them,” but if the entire verse is read, it is clear that the “slaying” is in also self-defense: “And slay them wherever you may come upon them, and drive them away from wherever they drove you away—for oppression is even worse than killing. And fight not against them near the Inviolable House of Worship [Ka’abah] unless they fight against you there first; but if they fight against you, slay them: such shall be the recompense of those who deny the truth” (2:191). If the enemy inclines toward peace, however, Muslims must follow suit: “But if they stop, God is most forgiving, most merciful” (2:192). Also read: “Now if they incline toward peace, then incline to it, and place your trust in God, for God is the all-hearing, the all-knowing” (8:61). Moreover, God insists that the Muslims should incline towards peace if their enemies do the same, even though the possibility might exist that the enemy is deceiving them: “And if they mean to deceive you, surely you can count on God, the one who strengthened you with Divine aid and with the believers” (8:62).

Even if those who fight against the believers are other believers, the Qur’an says that they should be fought against: “If two parties of believers contend with each other, make peace between them. Then if one of the two acts unjustly to the other, fight the side that transgresses until it goes back to the order of God…” (49:9) [emphasis added]. Again, fighting is only allowed against those who transgress, those who fight against the believers. Indeed, the Qur’an explains why fighting and warfare is even allowed in God’s Plan. An important reason is to prevent oppression on the earth, in keeping with the Qur’an’s strong insistence that justice be upheld: “Why would you not fight in the cause of God, and oppressed men, women, and children, who say, ‘Our Lord, get us out of this town, whose people are oppressors. And provide us a protector from You, and provide us a helper from You’” (4:75). Yet, an equally important reason—and one that may come as a surprise to the reader—is to protect the free and unfettered worship of God:

“For if God did not parry people by means of one another, then monasteries and churches and synagogues and mosques—wherein the name of God is much recited—would surely be demolished. And God will surely defend those who defend God—for God is powerful, almighty” (22:40).

This is truly remarkable. The Qur’an endorses armed conflict, as a last resort, in order to protect Christian, Jewish, and Muslim houses of worship. So much for Islam’s intolerance. This principle is further outlined in this verse: “Hence, fight against them until there is no more oppression (lit., fitnah), and all worship is devoted to God alone; but if they desist, then all hostility shall cease, save against those who [willfully] do wrong” (2:193). The verse states that Muslims should fight them on until there is no more fitnah. In verse 2:191 above, again it says that “oppression (lit., fitnah) is even worse than killing.” What is this fitnah?

The word fitnah appears at least 28 times in the Qur’an, and its use and meaning varies depending on the verse in question. Some classical commentators, particularly Ibn Kathir, have written that fitnah, especially in verse 2:193, denotes idolatry. As a result, those who wish to smear Islam use the opinion of Ibn Kathir to speak for the text and claim that the Qur’an says: “Become Muslim or die.” Yet, despite the scholar’s opinion, the text of the Qur’an itself, and how it uses the word fitnah, does not agree with this scholar’s interpretation. For example, in quite a few verses, fitnah means “trial or tribulation”: “And know that your possessions and your children are but a trial (lit., fitnah), and that there is a higher reward in the presence of God” (8:28). Also read: “Every living being tastes death: and We try you with ill and good as a test (lit., fitnah); and you will be returned to Us” (21:35). Yet another verse says: “All the emissaries We sent before you did eat food and walked along the streets. And We made some of you a trial (lit., fitnah) for others; will you be forbearing? For your Lord is all-seeing” (25:20). In other verses, fitnah means corruption and discord (9:47-48) Now, in verse 33:14, fitnah does indeed mean apostasy: “But if they were invaded from the sides, then asked to dissent and join in civil war, they would do so with but little delay” (33:14). The verse literally says “…and they were asked for fitnah, they would do so with but little delay.” The “they” in this verse refers to the Hypocrites, about whom we discussed earlier. The use of the word fitnah here, however, can not be generalized to every other verse in the Qur’an.

Verse 2:193, which exhorts the believers to “fight against them until there is no more fitnah, and all worship is devoted to God alone” must be understood in context. This verse comes after verse 2:190, which commands the believers to fight those who fight them, i.e., the hostile Arabs who stopped at nothing to be the first to draw Muslim blood. In addition, these people, especially the Meccan oligarchy, violently persecuted any new converts to Islam and prevented the free worship of God by these Muslims. It is to this religious persecution, I believe, that the word fitnah in 2:193 refers. This definition of fitnah is supported by another verse, which responded to the Meccans’ claim that the Prophet does not honor the sanctity of the Sacred Months. Recall that the Muslims mistakenly killed a Meccan during one of the Sacred Months, when fighting between enemies is strictly forbidden. The verse reads: “They ask you [O Muhammad] about fighting in the sacred month. Say, ‘Fighting then is an offense; but more offensive to God is blocking the way to the path of God, denying God, preventing access to the sacred mosque, and driving out its people. And persecution (lit., fitnah) is worse than killing…” (2:217). Again, here the fitnah about which the verse is speaking is the prevention of access to the path of God and His Sacred Mosque, driving out the believers from Mecca, and even denying God Himself. All this is the violent repression of religious freedom, and this must be prevented, even if it means armed conflict. Again, this whole discussion about fighting until there is no more fitnah follows the same theme of fighting only in self-defense. A more careful analysis of the Qur’an—in its proper historical, linguistic, and textual context—clearly shows that it does not give a general, time-honored exhortation to kill all non-Muslims. That Islam calls for a “war on unbelievers” is sheer fallacy and utter fantasy.

[1] Literally, “those who “partnerize” God,” i.e. those who place their trust in imaginary gods, i.e. who worship the idols of their own superstition or self-interest
 
This is political. Calling people with differing ideas than yours, "the darkness" does not make it spiritual warfare.



No. It is not safe to say that. Islam is not the enemy.



I think with the right historical context (and any context in general) the verses make sense. It was a time of war. The verses of violence are not meant for all those that do not believe like them. They are meant for the meccans who waged war on Mohammad and his followers.

Just like the Bible, the Qur'an can be misinterpreted and taken out of context. Such is the case with terrorism where they use it to advance an agenda, and such is the case with a majority of the information we hear vomited from our politicians mouths and on TV/internet.



Because fear is not in the language of love. Because all the we hear about Islam in America is about the perversions of the extremists. Because the "information" we receive plays to our fear and fear is the devils fart.



How beautiful the world would be if they practiced it too.
wait hold on so you're saying muslims practice a religion that is taken out of context? What is the main context than when it comes to people who don't believe like them? I'm not saying that people don't have a sense of general morality but things can get misinterpreted for people who are following that religion
 
IS ISLAM A “RELIGION OF THE SWORD”?
Kabir Helminski and Hesham Hessaboula

There are a number of verses in the Qur’an that appear to call for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, and these verses have been too often quoted out of context with what appears to be a willful disregard of the context in which they occur. Among these—and perhaps the most often cited—is the infamous “Verse of the Sword”: “Kill the mushrikeen[1] (those Meccans who had declared war against Muhammad and his community) wherever you find them, and capture them, and blockade them, and watch for them at every lookout…”(9:5). On the surface, this verse would seem to bolster the claim that Islam advocates violence against non-Muslims. There is much more to this story, however. This verse, and the others like it in the Qur’an, have a linguistic, historical, and textual context. Understanding that context is essential in understanding the message of the verse. Careful and unbiased study of these verses, in their proper context, will reveal that the exhortations to fight “idolators” and “unbelievers” are specific in nature and are not general injunctions for the murder of all those who refuse to accept Islam as their way of life. We must remember the challenging historical circumstances of these Qur’anic verses. As is known from the Prophet’s biography, the Meccan oligarchy fought against the Prophet’s message from the very beginning. It resorted to violent repression and torture of the Prophet and his followers when they realized that the flow of converts to Islam was increasing. The Prophet himself survived several assassination attempts, and it became so dangerous for the Muslims in Mecca that the Prophet sent some of his companions to take asylum in the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia. After thirteen years of violence, Muhammad was compelled to take refuge in the city of Medina, and even then the Meccans did not relent in their hostilities. Later, furthermore, various hostile Arab tribes joined in the fight against the Muslims, culminating in the Battle of the Trench, when 10,000 soldiers from many Arab tribes gathered to wipe out the Muslim community once and for all. As we know, the Muslims survived these challenges and eventually went on to establish a vast civilization.

At the time Verse 9:5 was revealed, Mecca had been conquered, the Meccans themselves had become Muslims, and many of the surrounding pagan Arab tribes had also accepted Islam and sent delegations to the Prophet pledging their allegiance to him. Those that did not become Muslim were the bitterest of enemies, and it was against these remaining hostile forces that the verse commands the Prophet to fight. It was in this violent context that the “Verse of the Sword” was revealed. This verse is part of a long chapter entitled “Repentance,” and it was revealed nine years after the Prophet immigrated to Medina.

Yet, verse 9:5 must never be quoted out of context. The verses immediately before and after it explain why verse 9:5 exhorts the believers to “kill idolaters wherever you find them.” The first verses state: “There is immunity from God and the messenger of God for those polytheists (mushrikeen) with whom you have made treaties; So travel the earth for four months, and know that you cannot elude God, and that it is God who brings disgrace upon all who refuse to acknowledge the truth” (9:1-2). The polytheists in these verses are those pagan Arabs who have deliberately broken the treaties they forged with the Prophet. How do we know this? Verse 4 continues: “Except those polytheists with whom you have made a treaty and who have not failed you in anything and have not helped anyone against you; fulfill your treaties with them to the end of their term, for God loves the conscientious.” Had we only quoted only 9:1-2, without the qualifying verse 9:4, it would seem that the Qur’an invalidates all non-aggression treaties made with the non-Muslims so that they can be “slaughtered” according to 9:5. That is clearly not the case. Those who want to malign Islam quote only 9:1-2 and neglect to mention 9:4.

Now, in its proper context, verse 9:5 can be properly understood. Most who quote 9:5 do so incompletely. The full verse reads: “But when the sacred months are past, then kill idolaters wherever you find them, and capture them, and blockade them, and watch for them at every lookout. But if they repent and practice prayer and give alms, then let them go their way; for God is most forgiving, most merciful.” This was a specific command to the Prophet at that specific time to fight those idolaters who were fighting the Muslims; those idolaters who, as 9:4 mentioned, failed in their treaty obligations and helped others fight against the Muslims. It is not a general command to attack all non-Muslims, and it has never signified this to the overwhelming majority of Muslims throughout history. Had it been so, then every year, after the “forbidden months are past,” history would have witnessed Muslims attacking every non-Muslim in sight. The “forbidden months” are four months out of the year during which fighting is not allowed. Three of them occur in a row: the eleventh, twelfth, and first month of the Islamic calendar. This yearly slaughter never occurred. In addition, if one reads on in the ninth chapter, the Qur’an further explains why 9:5 commands the Prophet to “kill idolaters wherever you find them”: “How, when if they get the better of you they do not respect either blood relations or treaty with you? They satisfy you with their words, but their hearts are averse, and most of them are dissolute” (9:8). Further along the Qur’an declares: “Will you not fight people who broke their oaths and planned to exile the messenger, and they took the initiative the first time? Do you fear them? God is more worthy of your fear, if you are believers” (9:13). These pagan tribes, as the Qur’an clearly states, would not hesitate in the least to attack and kill the Muslims at their first chance, and thus they must be fought against. Furthermore, if 9:5 was a general exhortation to kill all non-Muslims, then verse 9:6 would make no sense: “And if one of the polytheists asks you for protection, then protect him, until he hears the word of God: then deliver him to a place safe for him. That is because they are people who do not know.” Yet, verse 9:6 does make sense because the command to “kill idolaters wherever you find them” refers solely to those who are in active hostility to the Muslims. Had verse 9:5 been an open invitation to kill all non-Muslims, it would have been more convenient for the verse to be revealed as soon as the Prophet arrived as leader in Medina, with an army of believers ready to fight to the death for him. Yet, as I previously mentioned, the verse was revealed nine years after the Prophet came to Medina.

Another set of verses seemingly declares that all non-believers are to be attacked and killed: “And let them not think—those who are bent on denying the truth [i.e., unbelievers]—that they shall escape [God]: behold, they can never frustrate [His purpose]. Hence, make ready against them whatever force and war mounts you are able to muster, so that you might deter thereby the enemies of God, who are your enemies as well, and others besides them of whom you may be unaware, but of whom God is aware; and whatever you may expend in God’s cause shall be repaid to you in full, and you shall not be wronged” (8:59-60). Once again, the textual context must be examined. These two verses refer to those who are in active hostility against the Muslim community. An examination of the verses that come before these elucidates this point: “As for those with whom you have made a covenant, and who thereupon break their covenant on every occasion, not being conscious of God—if you find them at war [with you], make of them a fearsome example for those who follow them, so that they might take it to heart; or, if you have reason to fear treachery from people [with whom you hast made a covenant], cast it back at them in an equitable manner: for, verily, God does not love the treacherous!” (8:56-59). When read together, it is clear that 8:59-60 speak of those unbelievers who actively fight against the Muslims and break their covenants “every time.” Again, there is no general exhortation to fight and kill all non-Muslims.

In yet another set of verses, the Qur’an tells the believers to kill non-believers not once, but twice: “…seize them and slay them wherever you may find them” (4:89) and “…seize them and slay them whenever you come upon them: for it is against these that We have clearly empowered you [to make war]” (4:91). We deliberately quoted these two verses out of context to illustrate how deceitful and misleading such a practice is. Again, once the verses are understood in context, it is quite clear that theses verses tell the Muslims to fight only those who fight them. First of all, theses verses are part of a slightly longer passage that begins thusly: “How, then, could you be of two minds about the hypocrites, seeing that God has disowned them because of their guilt? Do you, perchance, seek to guide those whom God has let go astray—when for him whom God lets go astray you can never find any way?” (4:88) The verse speaks of the “hypocrites,” which begs the question of who these “hypocrites” are. They are those Muslims who feigned outward acceptance of Islam, but secretly worked for the destruction of the Muslims. They constantly acted as a fifth column within the Muslim community in Medina. Chief among them, as we discussed earlier, was Abdullah ibn Ubay. This man worked continually to harm the Muslims. For example, on the way to the mountain of Uhud, where the second battle against the pagans in Mecca took place, Abdullah ibn Ubay told his followers to go back home because he did not think a battle was going to be waged. His followers, and some true believing Muslims, obeyed him, and the Muslim army was cut by two-thirds, from 1000 men to approximately 300. During this battle, the Prophet was severely wounded and was nearly killed by the Meccans.

Yet, despite their treachery, verses 4:89 and 4:91 do not call on the Prophet to “kill them all,” but only those who are in open hostility to him: “They [the hypocrites] would love to see you deny the truth even as they have denied it, so that you should be like them. Do not, therefore, take them for your allies until they forsake the domain of evil for the sake of God; and if they revert to open enmity, seize them and slay them wherever you may find them. And do not take any of them for your ally or giver of succor” (4:89) [emphasis added]. Furthermore, 4:90 explains that if these hypocrites do not fight the Muslims, they are not to be harmed: “Unless it be those that have ties with people to whom you yourselves are bound by a covenant, or such as come to you because their hearts shrink from [the thought of] making war either on you or on their own folk… Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, God does not allow you to harm them.”

The same is true for the following verse 4:91: “You will find others who would like to be safe from you as well as from their own folk, but who, whenever they are faced anew with temptation to evil, plunge into it headlong. Hence, if they do not let you be, and do not offer you peace, and do not stay their hands, seize them and slay them whenever you come upon them: for it is against these that We have clearly empowered you.” [emphasis added] Yet again, the Qur’an says to fight only those who fight against the Muslims.

It should be quite obvious by now that there is a recurring theme in the above verses: fighting is only in self defense, and it is only against those who fight against the Muslims. Indeed, Islam is a religion that seeks to maximize peace and reconciliation. Yet, Islam is not a pacifist religion; it does accept the premise that, from time to time and as a last resort, arms must be taken up in a just war. If Muslims are fought against, Islam demands that they fight back. Hence, one will find very belligerent verses in the Qur’an, such as the ones I quoted above. But, as we mentioned, these verses exist in a context and are specific in their scope. They are not general exhortations to violence. The Qur’an is quite clear about this. The verses concerning fighting that were revealed soon after the Prophet arrived in Medina are self-defensive in nature: “Victims of aggression are given license [to fight] because they have been done injustice; and God is well able to help them” (22:39). Why was this permission granted? The Qur’an continues: “[They are] those evicted from their homes without reason except that they say, ‘Our Sustainer is God’…” (22:40).

Furthermore, when Muslims do fight in war, all is not “fair,” as it has been said. Islamic Law has always recognized principles of just war. Muslims are strictly forbidden to commit aggression: “And fight for the sake of God those who fight you; but do not be brutal or commit aggression, for God does not love brutal aggression” (2:190). The next verse also says, “slay them wherever you may come upon them,” but if the entire verse is read, it is clear that the “slaying” is in also self-defense: “And slay them wherever you may come upon them, and drive them away from wherever they drove you away—for oppression is even worse than killing. And fight not against them near the Inviolable House of Worship [Ka’abah] unless they fight against you there first; but if they fight against you, slay them: such shall be the recompense of those who deny the truth” (2:191). If the enemy inclines toward peace, however, Muslims must follow suit: “But if they stop, God is most forgiving, most merciful” (2:192). Also read: “Now if they incline toward peace, then incline to it, and place your trust in God, for God is the all-hearing, the all-knowing” (8:61). Moreover, God insists that the Muslims should incline towards peace if their enemies do the same, even though the possibility might exist that the enemy is deceiving them: “And if they mean to deceive you, surely you can count on God, the one who strengthened you with Divine aid and with the believers” (8:62).

Even if those who fight against the believers are other believers, the Qur’an says that they should be fought against: “If two parties of believers contend with each other, make peace between them. Then if one of the two acts unjustly to the other, fight the side that transgresses until it goes back to the order of God…” (49:9) [emphasis added]. Again, fighting is only allowed against those who transgress, those who fight against the believers. Indeed, the Qur’an explains why fighting and warfare is even allowed in God’s Plan. An important reason is to prevent oppression on the earth, in keeping with the Qur’an’s strong insistence that justice be upheld: “Why would you not fight in the cause of God, and oppressed men, women, and children, who say, ‘Our Lord, get us out of this town, whose people are oppressors. And provide us a protector from You, and provide us a helper from You’” (4:75). Yet, an equally important reason—and one that may come as a surprise to the reader—is to protect the free and unfettered worship of God:

“For if God did not parry people by means of one another, then monasteries and churches and synagogues and mosques—wherein the name of God is much recited—would surely be demolished. And God will surely defend those who defend God—for God is powerful, almighty” (22:40).

This is truly remarkable. The Qur’an endorses armed conflict, as a last resort, in order to protect Christian, Jewish, and Muslim houses of worship. So much for Islam’s intolerance. This principle is further outlined in this verse: “Hence, fight against them until there is no more oppression (lit., fitnah), and all worship is devoted to God alone; but if they desist, then all hostility shall cease, save against those who [willfully] do wrong” (2:193). The verse states that Muslims should fight them on until there is no more fitnah. In verse 2:191 above, again it says that “oppression (lit., fitnah) is even worse than killing.” What is this fitnah?

The word fitnah appears at least 28 times in the Qur’an, and its use and meaning varies depending on the verse in question. Some classical commentators, particularly Ibn Kathir, have written that fitnah, especially in verse 2:193, denotes idolatry. As a result, those who wish to smear Islam use the opinion of Ibn Kathir to speak for the text and claim that the Qur’an says: “Become Muslim or die.” Yet, despite the scholar’s opinion, the text of the Qur’an itself, and how it uses the word fitnah, does not agree with this scholar’s interpretation. For example, in quite a few verses, fitnah means “trial or tribulation”: “And know that your possessions and your children are but a trial (lit., fitnah), and that there is a higher reward in the presence of God” (8:28). Also read: “Every living being tastes death: and We try you with ill and good as a test (lit., fitnah); and you will be returned to Us” (21:35). Yet another verse says: “All the emissaries We sent before you did eat food and walked along the streets. And We made some of you a trial (lit., fitnah) for others; will you be forbearing? For your Lord is all-seeing” (25:20). In other verses, fitnah means corruption and discord (9:47-48) Now, in verse 33:14, fitnah does indeed mean apostasy: “But if they were invaded from the sides, then asked to dissent and join in civil war, they would do so with but little delay” (33:14). The verse literally says “…and they were asked for fitnah, they would do so with but little delay.” The “they” in this verse refers to the Hypocrites, about whom we discussed earlier. The use of the word fitnah here, however, can not be generalized to every other verse in the Qur’an.

Verse 2:193, which exhorts the believers to “fight against them until there is no more fitnah, and all worship is devoted to God alone” must be understood in context. This verse comes after verse 2:190, which commands the believers to fight those who fight them, i.e., the hostile Arabs who stopped at nothing to be the first to draw Muslim blood. In addition, these people, especially the Meccan oligarchy, violently persecuted any new converts to Islam and prevented the free worship of God by these Muslims. It is to this religious persecution, I believe, that the word fitnah in 2:193 refers. This definition of fitnah is supported by another verse, which responded to the Meccans’ claim that the Prophet does not honor the sanctity of the Sacred Months. Recall that the Muslims mistakenly killed a Meccan during one of the Sacred Months, when fighting between enemies is strictly forbidden. The verse reads: “They ask you [O Muhammad] about fighting in the sacred month. Say, ‘Fighting then is an offense; but more offensive to God is blocking the way to the path of God, denying God, preventing access to the sacred mosque, and driving out its people. And persecution (lit., fitnah) is worse than killing…” (2:217). Again, here the fitnah about which the verse is speaking is the prevention of access to the path of God and His Sacred Mosque, driving out the believers from Mecca, and even denying God Himself. All this is the violent repression of religious freedom, and this must be prevented, even if it means armed conflict. Again, this whole discussion about fighting until there is no more fitnah follows the same theme of fighting only in self-defense. A more careful analysis of the Qur’an—in its proper historical, linguistic, and textual context—clearly shows that it does not give a general, time-honored exhortation to kill all non-Muslims. That Islam calls for a “war on unbelievers” is sheer fallacy and utter fantasy.

[1] Literally, “those who “partnerize” God,” i.e. those who place their trust in imaginary gods, i.e. who worship the idols of their own superstition or self-interest
(So there is only justification in the fact that people who rage war on muslims deserve to be shown the truth. We can't be on the side of those who transgress and if we are than we must be on the opposing side.) Where you guys get it wrong is how you treat christians.. It has nothing to do with non-muslims in general but christians. We believe that Jesus was the Son of God and that he came to die for our sins and rose from the dead. This goes directly against your idea of partnerizing with God or the practice of imaginary gods since our God is generally invisible. Killing is worse than persecution. Its not the other way around. And who is to say when someone sees the truth after they have died? But I get your point its religious and so is mine. You are not raging war against those don't believe but in a way you are raging war against those who don't believe like you out of self-defense. How do you see the Muslim-ban in the U.S.? Fitnah sounds like what we would call SIN.
 
Almost glad I worked hard and am tired tonight. Not reading all that now, so no comment.
 
wait hold on so you're saying muslims practice a religion that is taken out of context?

Did I derp my words that badly? I must've because that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the information your average American receives about Islam is taken out of context and is used to promote fear. The Muslim's we hear about, the extremists, are perverting the message and taking bits out of it's historical context and we are taking passages from it out of context to justify our hatred and rejection of an entire portion of the human population. For non Muslim's it is a mess. Terrorists dominate the news with violence and praise for Islam as if they are representative of the entirety of Islam. We are force fed this crap about Islam being violent based on the behavior of a few thousand individuals while there are millions more that just want to exist peacefully like the rest of us.


If Christians wish to love, should they not seek to understand?


How do you see the Muslim-ban in the U.S.?


I see a "Muslim ban" as ignorant turd balling that plays right into the terrorists plans. It's an action based on fear and allows them recruit new members. When we do not accept Muslims, the terrorists can say, "See! The west rejects you. America hates you. Join us! They are your enemy." We think we are protecting ourselves with this shit, but we are only strengthening their cause.


I am not saying we should allow them free reign in the country without a vetting process, though. Things are too deep for that right now. Of course, it is possible that without vetting the individuals we let a couple with extremist views into our borders. The vast majority do not hold those views and only wish to live as you and I. However, if we judge them, reject them and oppress them, we risk creating terrorists within our borders as well as abroad. That is more a result of a felled human nature rather than religion. A need for belonging, to be accepted.


You are not raging war against those don't believe but in a way you are raging war against those who don't believe like you out of self-defense.


No. I am not waging, raging, or engaging in war with anyone except my own filth. Muslim's, as a whole, are not either. What is most unfortunate, however understandable, is that we Americans learn about Islam through the news, politicians, and non-Islam religious organizations. The result of this is misinformation and a dehumanization of human beings. We see and hear about the murders in the name of Islam and that is the view we adopt. That Islam is a religion of murder. This is not true. When we hear of jihad we immediately think holy war. This in itself is a misrepresentation of the word. Jihad is more like striving, an internal struggle between error/truth, selfishness/selflessness, a hardened heart/all encompassing love. A struggle common to every human that is not content with there own ignorance.


Interpretations of the Qur'an, to represent Islam, must meet certain requirements. It must be based on knowledge, motivated by piety, it must serve the public interest of Muslim's and humanity in general. Groups like the Taliban and Isis have no consideration for meeting the acceptable requirements of interpretation or authority
of Islam. They misrepresent the religion and we base our assumptions on the misrepresentation of Islam.

The Qur'an does permit the jihad of violence, but only if the people have been deprived of basic rights to live and support themselves. In such cases, action cannot be taken by individuals (terrorists) but by the collective wisdom of the entire Muslim community. They are not permitted to destroy property, harm women and children or unarmed civilians. The terrorists activities are not permitted in the Qur'an. Terrorists are not acting as true Muslim's.

Islamic relations with people of other religions are to be as tolerant as possible.

"Do not argue with the followers of the earlier revelations otherwise than in a most kindly manner--unless it be such of them as are bent on evil doing--and say: We believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you; for our God and your God is one and the same, and it is unto Him that we all surrender ourselves. (Holy Qur'an 29:46)

We believe that Jesus was the Son of God and that he came to die for our sins and rose from the dead. This goes directly against your idea of partnerizing with God or the practice of imaginary gods since our God is generally invisible

Can you please explain this to me? Because... Just because...
 
You know if we discuss the morality of political decisions nothing is black and white and ideas/orders become spectrums of good and evil. And as a christian, I would say we are not fighting refugees from countries but refugees of people from their own religion. For people who don't believe Jesus was God or that there is a God at all. Trump is an idiot who is making orders that are obviously inapplicable to everybody else and that's not fair. For the christian, it's unethical as well to a point. That point being where verses in the bible clash and verses in the qu'ran. That religion is preaching peace in regards to being morality being universal ALWAYS with no exceptions.

There is really no spectrum when killing is done in the name of whomever...Mohammad or Jesus....both Christianity and Islam are guilty of atrocities across time and the globe.
And it still is going on...yes, there are terrorists...but I don’t see them as any different than a crazy dude walking down the street in a bad part of town high on PCP and pointing a gun at anything that moves....the motives are clearly different, but you get from A - B the same way.
Or an abortion Doctor being gunned down...the OK city bombing was religiously motivated.
As was Waco...so what’s the point?
Kind of like the dude that held a prayer meeting with all the black parishioners then opened fire on them trying to incite a race/religious war.
Some nut in Canada shoots up a Mosque an the US media barely mentions it....speaking of that...have you heard the one about the Mosque in TX that was burned down under “mysterious” circumstances?
Probably not, because the media here (of which D. Trump is a part) is full of shit.
People here don’t practice what they preach...they are weekend warriors for Jesus and the rest of the time apathetic worthless human garbage.
 
There is really no spectrum when killing is done in the name of whomever...Mohammad or Jesus....both Christianity and Islam are guilty of atrocities across time and the globe.
And it still is going on...yes, there are terrorists...but I don’t see them as any different than a crazy dude walking down the street in a bad part of town high on PCP and pointing a gun at anything that moves....the motives are clearly different, but you get from A - B the same way.
Or an abortion Doctor being gunned down...the OK city bombing was religiously motivated.
As was Waco...so what’s the point?
Kind of like the dude that held a prayer meeting with all the black parishioners then opened fire on them trying to incite a race/religious war.
Some nut in Canada shoots up a Mosque an the US media barely mentions it....speaking of that...have you heard the one about the Mosque in TX that was burned down under “mysterious” circumstances?
Probably not, because the media here (of which D. Trump is a part) is full of shit.
People here don’t practice what they preach...they are weekend warriors for Jesus and the rest of the time apathetic worthless human garbage.

I get it. Human death can never be justified and ignorance has become an endless virtue;however, as a diplomat or independent it becomes diffucult to piece countries together since we are divided by tolerances and convictions. That's my whole point. And that peace that everyone tries to find is never found only hope and faith. Misinterpretation and personal wisdom has just recked us all hasn't it? Haha
 
Did I derp my words that badly? I must've because that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the information your average American receives about Islam is taken out of context and is used to promote fear. The Muslim's we hear about, the extremists, are perverting the message and taking bits out of it's historical context and we are taking passages from it out of context to justify our hatred and rejection of an entire portion of the human population. For non Muslim's it is a mess. Terrorists dominate the news with violence and praise for Islam as if they are representative of the entirety of Islam. We are force fed this crap about Islam being violent based on the behavior of a few thousand individuals while there are millions more that just want to exist peacefully like the rest of us.


If Christians wish to love, should they not seek to understand?


As a human being I would say that regardless of tolerances I admire everyone with no judgement. However, if I always had the christian perspective I would be acknowledging people on their faith or lack thereof in Jesus Christ. Of course, I'm not a street preacher and I'm not going around condeming anyone like many people try to do people. This goes against everybody's perception of truth and tolerance. So I myself try to understand why Americans who believe they are a christian nation can hate someone who doesn't always hate them. Understandings are sometimes vague because not everyone agrees with you. I question my own views with you. IS that not called love at least on my behalf?

I see a "Muslim ban" as ignorant turd balling that plays right into the terrorists plans. It's an action based on fear and allows them recruit new members. When we do not accept Muslims, the terrorists can say, "See! The west rejects you. America hates you. Join us! They are your enemy." We think we are protecting ourselves with this shit, but we are only strengthening their cause.

That's a great point. But our war here in America isn't anything to do with global issues sometimes. Just look it Trump. Ill give him credit for calling out the entire agenda of media outlets. So yes I do think religions do get misinterpreted but at the end of the day what religion is actually going to bring nations together? A peace that surpasses all fears and a love that covers a multitude of sins?


I am not saying we should allow them free reign in the country without a vetting process, though. Things are too deep for that right now. Of course, it is possible that without vetting the individuals we let a couple with extremist views into our borders. The vast majority do not hold those views and only wish to live as you and I. However, if we judge them, reject them and oppress them, we risk creating terrorists within our borders as well as abroad. That is more a result of a felled human nature rather than religion. A need for belonging, to be accepted.

Yes I do think the muslim ban is racist towards people in the middle east but what if a canadian was following islam? what than? haha But c'mon how on earth are you suppose to keep radical extremists out of a country? Our media has shown us that its all muslims but its more than that.


No. I am not waging, raging, or engaging in war with anyone except my own filth. Muslim's, as a whole, are not either. What is most unfortunate, however understandable, is that we Americans learn about Islam through the news, politicians, and non-Islam religious organizations. The result of this is misinformation and a dehumanization of human beings. We see and hear about the murders in the name of Islam and that is the view we adopt. That Islam is a religion of murder. This is not true. When we hear of jihad we immediately think holy war. This in itself is a misrepresentation of the word. Jihad is more like striving, an internal struggle between error/truth, selfishness/selflessness, a hardened heart/all encompassing love. A struggle common to every human that is not content with there own ignorance.

So if most muslims believe they are peaceful why do they consistently go after Israel? Honest question.


Interpretations of the Qur'an, to represent Islam, must meet certain requirements. It must be based on knowledge, motivated by piety, it must serve the public interest of Muslim's and humanity in general. Groups like the Taliban and Isis have no consideration for meeting the acceptable requirements of interpretation or authority
of Islam. They misrepresent the religion and we base our assumptions on the misrepresentation of Islam.

Yes that may be true. The real question is how to eliminate terrorists.

The Qur'an does permit the jihad of violence, but only if the people have been deprived of basic rights to live and support themselves. In such cases, action cannot be taken by individuals (terrorists) but by the collective wisdom of the entire Muslim community. They are not permitted to destroy property, harm women and children or unarmed civilians. The terrorists activities are not permitted in the Qur'an. Terrorists are not acting as true Muslim's.

But these permissions are entirely subjective? Did not a muslim leader conquer an island and skin all the priests who were roman catholic in the name of allah. He found justification within his entire muslim community. That does not make it right. Wisdom can become manipulative to justify a greater good that doesn't exist.
Islamic relations with people of other religions are to be as tolerant as possible.

At least for now. For both sides?

"Do not argue with the followers of the earlier revelations otherwise than in a most kindly manner--unless it be such of them as are bent on evil doing--and say: We believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you; for our God and your God is one and the same, and it is unto Him that we all surrender ourselves. (Holy Qur'an 29:46)



Can you please explain this to me? Because... Just because...
 
I get it. Human death can never be justified and ignorance has become an endless virtue;however, as a diplomat or independent it becomes diffucult to piece countries together since we are divided by tolerances and convictions. That's my whole point. And that peace that everyone tries to find is never found only hope and faith. Misinterpretation and personal wisdom has just recked us all hasn't it? Haha

Well the point is being missed by those running the show.
Specifically banning travel to and from countries that have not brought terrorists to the US...if that were the mission then he should also include Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc. Instead it’s this kind of thoughtless wave of a hand grouping and dismissing people based on religious values - values that are supposed to be separated from laws in this nation (after people freaked out about Sharia Law coming to the US, instead they start to legislate they own majority religious laws...so even now we have the repeal of the Transgender bathroom law...and supposedly now “states rights” have the power to discriminate should they so choose.
That’s the point of laws on a Federal level...several times now, it is necessary to implement Federal laws as opposed to states rights because they WILL discriminate, just as they did during the civil rights marches in the 1960’s. Federal laws were enacted because certain racist states did not want to comply.
It’s all spelled out in the 14th amendment, states are easily superseded.
Well, now it’s reversed...now, in the name of religious doctrine and specific religious beliefs others can/will be subjected to non-equal treatment.
Google how the suicide rates dropped when that law was passed...now what do you think the outcome will be?
Look up the Amnesty International annual State of Human Rights around the world and they specifically name the rhetoric of D. Trump as a key person spreading more fear-mongering, hatred, division, and ultimately the loss of human life because people like him are so afraid via certain media outlets that we cut off refugees in a blanket fashion, amongst other things.
Our penal system is motivated for-profit in most cases as are some police deprts. here, and the statistics don’t lie when they say blacks and hispanics are pulled over more often...less likely to be let off...more likely to serve time....given longer prison terms than their white counterparts.
So we do have a long way to go, just here at home.
The vocabulary of fear-mongering and anti-this/that vomitus that spills from Trump’s mouth is quite sad and makes me ashamed to be an “American” at this time...apathy and selfishness have ruled over compassion and a willingness to “turn the other cheek”.
This will be remembered as being on the wrong side of history one day....if not currently.
It is a “Muslim” ban, because Trump made sure not to include any of the poor “under assault” Christian minorities from the banned countries.
It isn’t more black and white than that man.
 
Last edited:
@cptawesome I can't properly quote your message so I put your words in quotations marks and replied below them...

"As a human being I would say that regardless of tolerances I admire everyone with no judgement. However, if I always had the christian perspective I would be acknowledging people on their faith or lack thereof in Jesus Christ. Of course, I'm not a street preacher and I'm not going around condeming anyone like many people try to do people. This goes against everybody's perception of truth and tolerance. So I myself try to understand why Americans who believe they are a christian nation can hate someone who doesn't always hate them. Understandings are sometimes vague because not everyone agrees with you. I question my own views with you. IS that not called love at least on my behalf?"

I think it is fantastic that you question your own views with me. Did I mention I am a Christian? I did, but you may have missed it because I think you are speaking to me like I am a Muslim. I am not, and I am no authority on Islam. That said, questioning your own views is, in my opinion is indeed an act of love. You are seeking understanding and that is a deal. It is important to note that in interfaith dialogue, the goal is understanding. A Christian can learn about other religions and not be less Christian. Understanding is essential.

"That's a great point. But our war here in America isn't anything to do with global issues sometimes. Just look it Trump. Ill give him credit for calling out the entire agenda of media outlets. So yes I do think religions do get misinterpreted but at the end of the day what religion is actually going to bring nations together? A peace that surpasses all fears and a love that covers a multitude of sins?"


It is a global issue when, out of ignorance and fear, we ban a religious group from entering our borders. It can also be a global issue as well as a domestic issue when we mistreat Muslim's that are already here. Religion is not the problem. The problem is the people and their lack of conviction, knowledge, faith. They believe the things religions tell us pertain to something else, life after death. They pass through this life without ever opening their eyes to see that it is all right here, right now.

People like to use religion as a way to belong to something greater than themselves. Which is fine, until belonging becomes superiority and an "us and them" mentality develops. Then we judge others for being different or not following truth as we understand it and all sorts of crap can come out of that, including violence. If we use religions as they were intended and taught, I believe there would be less violence, because the battle is within not with others.

"Yes I do think the muslim ban is racist towards people in the middle east but what if a canadian was following islam? what than? haha But c'mon how on earth are you suppose to keep radical extremists out of a country? Our media has shown us that its all muslims but its more than that"


Islam is not the problem. So if a Canadian Muslim enters the US, big deal. I think prevention is a good start for keeping extremists out. By accepting, being kind, friendly and loving to current Muslim's and refugees, we demonstrate that we are not the enemy as the extremists claim we are. Love is the answer, yes? God is love, and love is active not passive.



 
Back
Top