Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


What music are you listen...
by zeca
Yesterday at 08:28 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
June 22, 2025, 03:34 PM

الحبيب من يشبه اكثر؟؟؟
by akay
June 21, 2025, 01:05 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
June 21, 2025, 07:37 AM

New Britain
June 20, 2025, 09:26 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
June 18, 2025, 09:24 PM

Is Iran/Persia going to b...
by zeca
June 17, 2025, 10:20 PM

News From Syria
June 17, 2025, 05:58 PM

Muslim grooming gangs sti...
June 17, 2025, 10:47 AM

ماذا يحدث هذه الايام؟؟؟.
by akay
June 02, 2025, 10:25 AM

What happens in these day...
June 02, 2025, 09:27 AM

What's happened to the fo...
June 01, 2025, 10:43 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Abrogation in the Quran

 (Read 14492 times)
  • 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Abrogation in the Quran
     OP - March 30, 2009, 09:54 AM

    The Quran contains the principle of abrogation or substitution, wherein a later verse is said to supercede a previous verse. I had asked this question in a different thread, & I received this reply.
    http://www.mostmerciful.com/abrogation-and-substitution.htm

    This site deals with issues like stoning, as well as the previous revelations of Moses & Jesus-but does not address the problematic issue of violence on non believers. The Mecca surahs are indeed reasonably tolerant, preaching stuff like "There is no compulsion in religion" while the Medina surahs are extremely belligerent-towards all sorts of "unbelievers"-idolaters, Jews,Christians or skeptics.

    How should one decide which surahs to follow?  Huh?

    Islam is so problematic in the world precisely because it allows for such a bewildering variety of interpretations, with no way to establish the supremacy of one over the other. Those who claim, "There is no compulsion in religion" & those who claim, "Smite at their necks" are both following "true Islam".

    Some people will try to get around the problematic Medina surahs by claiming that they were revealed in a particular context-namely the Prophet's wars. However, to understand the context, we have to study the hadiths & again the hadiths are chock full of unpleasant incidents & violence.

    So, in light of the variety of principles regarding violence set forth in the Quran itself, which often blatantly contradict one another & the doctrine of abrogation which gives precedence to violence, what does one do?


    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #1 - March 30, 2009, 12:53 PM

    The Quran contains the principle of abrogation or substitution, wherein a later verse is said to supercede a previous verse. I had asked this question in a different thread, & I received this reply.
    http://www.mostmerciful.com/abrogation-and-substitution.htm

    This site deals with issues like stoning, as well as the previous revelations of Moses & Jesus-but does not address the problematic issue of violence on non believers. The Mecca surahs are indeed reasonably tolerant, preaching stuff like "There is no compulsion in religion" while the Medina surahs are extremely belligerent-towards all sorts of "unbelievers"-idolaters, Jews,Christians or skeptics.

    How should one decide which surahs to follow?  Huh?

    Islam is so problematic in the world precisely because it allows for such a bewildering variety of interpretations, with no way to establish the supremacy of one over the other. Those who claim, "There is no compulsion in religion" & those who claim, "Smite at their necks" are both following "true Islam".

    Some people will try to get around the problematic Medina surahs by claiming that they were revealed in a particular context-namely the Prophet's wars. However, to understand the context, we have to study the hadiths & again the hadiths are chock full of unpleasant incidents & violence.

    So, in light of the variety of principles regarding violence set forth in the Quran itself, which often blatantly contradict one another & the doctrine of abrogation which gives precedence to violence, what does one do?




    Good questions, Rashna

    I don't have too much time now but I would like to put down some comments.

    As far as Qur'aan is concerned, it has repealed, repudiated and abrogated the Christian Bible and the Jewish Bible. I have covered the statement using the three words.

    So, for Muslims, those books are not valid anymore. You will notice the same, when a Christian or a Jew embraces Islam, he/she gives up those books.

    Why does one find the problem, you mentioned, come up?

    Because various sects, use that verse as an excuse to justify their interpretations. Our shia brothers do it to justify their
    own interpretations and our sunni brothers use them to force their views upon others, which is wrong.

    Cheers
    BMZ

  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #2 - March 30, 2009, 02:01 PM

    Why does one find the problem, you mentioned, come up?

    Because various sects, use that verse as an excuse to justify their interpretations. Our shia brothers do it to justify their
    own interpretations and our sunni brothers use them to force their views upon others, which is wrong.


    You haven't really addressed the issue, the fact people can use it to justify what they want is a symptom of the problem, not the problem. The problem is contradictory verses.

    The Qur'an evolved over a period of 20 years. 10 in Mecca where Muhammad was not accepted as a prophet and 10 in Yathrib where he gained power and ascendancy over the Meccans and the rest of Arabia.

    Hence it is obvious the message changed to accommodate the shifting tides of Muhammad's fortunes enabling him to justify his actions or appease his enemies.

    The No compulsion verse as it is, was never even intended to state that people can believe in any religion they want to. This was revealed to enable the Ansars (helpers, those in Medina) to change their children's religion to Islam. This is documented in the hadiths. It was never intended to mean that a Muslim can adopt another religion. If that was so then there would be ruling against apostasy. There would be no need for dhimmitude and there would be no need to pagans to convert or be killed.

    Knowing Islam is the only true religion we do not allow propagation of any other religion. How can we allow building of churches and temples when their religion is wrong? Thus we will not allow such wrong things in our countries. - Zakir Naik
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #3 - March 30, 2009, 02:29 PM

    Actually I wanted to wait for marleya answering my query since I'd started this topic in reply to her views that "There is no compulsion in religion..." but since this topic has already received answers,I'll put in my two cents.I've referred to an article by Robert Spencer, coz I think if Marleya can use an Islamic website to answer my query, I can use articles by scholars who hold unfavorable views of Islam as well.However, to cross check, I have also used a link from an Islamic website.
     BTW,  Afro a.ghazali!

    Many traditional Islamic theologians and Qur'an commentators argue that the violent verses of sura 9 abrogate more relatively tolerant material such as sura 109. When discussing why Muhammad didn't begin sura 9 with the customary invocation bismillah ar-rahman ar-rahim, in the name of Allah, the compassionate, the merciful, an intriguing answer comes from a Qur'an commentary that is still highly valued today in the Islamic world, Tafsir al-Jalalayn. This is a fifteenth-century work by the renowned imams Jalal al-Din Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Mahalli (1389-1459) and Jalal al-Din Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr al-Suyuti (1445-1505). The invocation, suggests this tafsir, is security, and [Sura 9] was sent down when security was removed by the sword.
    Security's removal by the sword meant specifically the end of many treaties the Muslims had made with non-Muslims. Another still-influential Qur'an commentator, Ibn Kathir (1301-1372) quotes an earlier authority, Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim, to establish that the Verse of the Sword, sura 9:5 ("slay the unbelievers wherever you find them") abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term.? He adds from another authority: No idolater had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Baraah was revealed.And yet another early commentator, Ibn Juzayy (d. 1340) agrees that one of this verse?s functions is abrogating every peace treaty in the Qur?an.?
    This idea is crucial as a guide to the relationship of the Quran's peaceful passages to its violent ones. Suras 16, 29, 52, 73, and 109 the sources of many of the Qur'an's verses of peace and tolerance are all Meccan. That means that many Muslims, guided by commentators such as those above and the imams who teach from them, see these suras only in light of what was revealed later in Medina. Being the last or next-to-last sura revealed, sura 9 is generally understood as being the Quran's last word on jihad, and all the rest of the book  including the tolerance verses must be read in its light.
    Ibn Kathir states this explicitly in his commentary on another tolerance verse And he [Muhammad] saith: O my Lord! Lo! these are a folk who believe not. Then bear with them (O Muhammad) and say: Peace. But they will come to know (Qur'an 43:88-89). The commentator explains that say Salam (peace!) means, do not respond to them in the same evil manner in which they address you; but try to soften their hearts and forgive them in word and deed. However, that is not the last word on the subject. As Ibn Kathir notes: But they will come to know. This is a warning from Allah for them. His punishment, which cannot be warded off, struck them, and His religion and His word was supreme. Subsequently Jihad and striving were prescribed until the people entered the religion of Allah in crowds, and Islam spread throughout the east and the west.

    A modern-day Chief Justice of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Humaid, has taught that in the Qur'an, at first the fighting was forbidden, then it was permitted and after that it was made obligatory. He also distinguishes two groups Muslims must fight: (1) against them who start the fighting against you (Muslims) . . . (2) and against all those who worship others along with Allah . . . as mentioned in Surat Al-Baqarah (II), Al-Imran (III) and At-Taubah (IX) . . . and other Surahs (Chapters of the Qur?an).? (The Roman numerals after the names of the chapters of the Quran are the numbers of the Suras: Sheikh Abdullah is referring to verses such as 2:216, 3:157-158, 9:5, and 9:29.)
    This understanding of the Quran isn't limited to the Wahhabi sect, to which Sheikh Abdullah belongs. The Pakistani Brigadier S. K. Malik's 1979 book The Quranic Concept of War (a book that made its way to the American mujahedin Jeffrey Leon Battle and October Martinique Lewis, and which carried a glowing endorsement from Pakistan?s then-future President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who said that it explained the ONLY pattern of warthat a Muslim country could legitimately wage) delineates the same stages in the Quranic teaching about jihad: The Muslim migration to Medina brought in its wake events and decisions of far-reaching significance and consequence for them. While in Mecca, they had neither been proclaimed an Ummah [community] nor were they granted the permission to take up arms against their oppressors. In Medina, a divine revelation proclaimed them an Ummah and granted them the permission to take up arms against their oppressors. The permission was soon afterwards converted into a divine command making war a religious obligation for the faithful.

    This an answer from the Islamic website Sunnipath, regarding the principle of abrogation, it too suggests that the later verses ie the violent verses cancel out the peaceful ones.
    http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=2656&CATE=1

    Thus according to the Quran, Muslim scholars throughout history upto the present date as well as various Islamist jihadists and "moderate" websites like Sunnipath-the Quranic verses preaching tolerance have been superceded by those preaching intolerance.

    The problem with the principle of abrogation isn't that the revelations to Jews & Christians have been superceded-the problem is that according to Quranic principles, no idolater, Trinitarian or non believer can live in peace in Dar ul Islam, they have to convert or die, while Jews & non Trinitarian Christians have to pay the jizya & face many restrictions & humiliations in their life as a non Muslim in Dar ul Islam. Also, Muslims will constantly attempt to expand the periphery of Dar ul Islam into Dar ul Harb's lands-leading to much strife.



    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #4 - March 30, 2009, 09:18 PM

    The Quran contains the principle of abrogation or substitution, wherein a later verse is said to supercede a previous verse. I had asked this question in a different thread, & I received this reply.
    http://www.mostmerciful.com/abrogation-and-substitution.htm

    This site deals with issues like stoning, as well as the previous revelations of Moses & Jesus-but does not address the problematic issue of violence on non believers. The Mecca surahs are indeed reasonably tolerant, preaching stuff like "There is no compulsion in religion" while the Medina surahs are extremely belligerent-towards all sorts of "unbelievers"-idolaters, Jews,Christians or skeptics.

    How should one decide which surahs to follow?  Huh?

    Islam is so problematic in the world precisely because it allows for such a bewildering variety of interpretations, with no way to establish the supremacy of one over the other. Those who claim, "There is no compulsion in religion" & those who claim, "Smite at their necks" are both following "true Islam".

    Some people will try to get around the problematic Medina surahs by claiming that they were revealed in a particular context-namely the Prophet's wars. However, to understand the context, we have to study the hadiths & again the hadiths are chock full of unpleasant incidents & violence.

    So, in light of the variety of principles regarding violence set forth in the Quran itself, which often blatantly contradict one another & the doctrine of abrogation which gives precedence to violence, what does one do?




    Good questions, Rashna

    I don't have too much time now but I would like to put down some comments.

    As far as Qur'aan is concerned, it has repealed, repudiated and abrogated the Christian Bible and the Jewish Bible. I have covered the statement using the three words.

    So, for Muslims, those books are not valid anymore. You will notice the same, when a Christian or a Jew embraces Islam, he/she gives up those books.

    Why does one find the problem, you mentioned, come up?

    Because various sects, use that verse as an excuse to justify their interpretations. Our shia brothers do it to justify their
    own interpretations and our sunni brothers use them to force their views upon others, which is wrong.

    Cheers
    BMZ


    A very comfortable answer BMz. Even reinforced with a logical answer for a change, and I commend you. However unfortunately, your premise is flawed and incomplete. Your answer is built to explain the premise that koran is made to abrogate other books.

    Your premise and associated logic however, both fall short of explain the condition that the verse was also (mainly) made to counter accusations of contradiction within the text of the koran.


    "Ask the slave girl; she will tell you the truth.' So the Apostle called Burayra to ask her. Ali got up and gave her a violent beating first, saying, 'Tell the Apostle the truth.'"
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #5 - March 31, 2009, 04:41 AM

    The Quran contains the principle of abrogation or substitution, wherein a later verse is said to supercede a previous verse. I had asked this question in a different thread, & I received this reply.
    http://www.mostmerciful.com/abrogation-and-substitution.htm

    This site deals with issues like stoning, as well as the previous revelations of Moses & Jesus-but does not address the problematic issue of violence on non believers. The Mecca surahs are indeed reasonably tolerant, preaching stuff like "There is no compulsion in religion" while the Medina surahs are extremely belligerent-towards all sorts of "unbelievers"-idolaters, Jews,Christians or skeptics.

    How should one decide which surahs to follow?  Huh?

    Islam is so problematic in the world precisely because it allows for such a bewildering variety of interpretations, with no way to establish the supremacy of one over the other. Those who claim, "There is no compulsion in religion" & those who claim, "Smite at their necks" are both following "true Islam".

    Some people will try to get around the problematic Medina surahs by claiming that they were revealed in a particular context-namely the Prophet's wars. However, to understand the context, we have to study the hadiths & again the hadiths are chock full of unpleasant incidents & violence.

    So, in light of the variety of principles regarding violence set forth in the Quran itself, which often blatantly contradict one another & the doctrine of abrogation which gives precedence to violence, what does one do?




    Good questions, Rashna

    I don't have too much time now but I would like to put down some comments.

    As far as Qur'aan is concerned, it has repealed, repudiated and abrogated the Christian Bible and the Jewish Bible. I have covered the statement using the three words.

    So, for Muslims, those books are not valid anymore. You will notice the same, when a Christian or a Jew embraces Islam, he/she gives up those books.

    Why does one find the problem, you mentioned, come up?

    Because various sects, use that verse as an excuse to justify their interpretations. Our shia brothers do it to justify their
    own interpretations and our sunni brothers use them to force their views upon others, which is wrong.

    Cheers
    BMZ


    A very comfortable answer BMz. Even reinforced with a logical answer for a change, and I commend you. However unfortunately, your premise is flawed and incomplete. Your answer is built to explain the premise that koran is made to abrogate other books.

    Your premise and associated logic however, both fall short of explain the condition that the verse was also (mainly) made to counter accusations of contradiction within the text of the koran.




    And what would be your contribution by way of an explanation of the verse, Baal?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #6 - April 02, 2009, 07:03 PM

    Peace!

    Thank you very much Rashna,for reminding me Smiley

    It is a difficult question,and when it comes to hadith islam,there is various meanings.

    http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1199279330532&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE

    Giving you another link,it is better than the other I gave you.I think.

  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #7 - April 03, 2009, 05:58 AM

    Peace!
    Thank you very much Rashna,for reminding me Smiley


     thnkyu marleya for answering my query & your endless patience! However, I'm not particularly satisfied with that explanation from Islamonline either. Here's my objection:

    That link speaks of how to deal with idolaters & says that those idolaters were fought against by the Prophet as they attacked first.

    Well, here are the verses concerning them:

    Sura, Sura IX.5: Then, when the sacred months have passed away, kill the idolaters wherever you find them  These words are usually cited to show what fate awaits idolaters. Well, what of the context The words immediately after these just quoted say, and seize them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere for them. Ah, you might say, you have deliberately left out the words that come after those. Let us quote them then,If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.? Surely these are words of tolerance, you plead. Hardly: they are saying that if they become Muslims then they will be left in peace.

    Thus the Sura itself says that the only way an idolater can be spared is if they convert to Islam. As you've pointed out, we also have to deal with the hadiths & we can see how Prophet Muhammad forcibly converted the idolaters. He marched into Mecca, smashed the idolaters idols chanting, "Truth has come..." & smashed idols, he also declared that those who came out of their homes to protect those idols will be killed. If today a Christian, say George Bush marches into Mecca, smashes the mosques & kaaba & threatens to kill any Muslim who comes out to protect the mosques-wouldn't that be forced conversion?

    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #8 - April 04, 2009, 02:21 PM

    Peace!
    Thank you very much Rashna,for reminding me Smiley


     thnkyu marleya for answering my query & your endless patience! However, I'm not particularly satisfied with that explanation from Islamonline either. Here's my objection:

    That link speaks of how to deal with idolaters & says that those idolaters were fought against by the Prophet as they attacked first.

    Well, here are the verses concerning them:

    Sura, Sura IX.5: Then, when the sacred months have passed away, kill the idolaters wherever you find them  These words are usually cited to show what fate awaits idolaters. Well, what of the context The words immediately after these just quoted say, and seize them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere for them. Ah, you might say, you have deliberately left out the words that come after those. Let us quote them then,If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.? Surely these are words of tolerance, you plead. Hardly: they are saying that if they become Muslims then they will be left in peace.

    Thus the Sura itself says that the only way an idolater can be spared is if they convert to Islam. As you've pointed out, we also have to deal with the hadiths & we can see how Prophet Muhammad forcibly converted the idolaters. He marched into Mecca, smashed the idolaters idols chanting, "Truth has come..." & smashed idols, he also declared that those who came out of their homes to protect those idols will be killed. If today a Christian, say George Bush marches into Mecca, smashes the mosques & kaaba & threatens to kill any Muslim who comes out to protect the mosques-wouldn't that be forced conversion?


    Peace Rashna!

    Thank you too,for patience and good answers Smiley

    When I look at the world today Rashna,the variation among cultures and tradition,I can not see that God,ment that muslims should kill anybody,that dont belive in him.If I belive that God created all humans,how could I think that his message is to kill any, that do not belive in Islam?Or any that leave it?Humans will rebell,against totalitarian regimes,in the end,and it can never bring peace,to force people.It would be only endless wars,and its attrocities,and no future for human being and the world.
    I dont think muslims have to think about heaven,before life here on this earth,is paradise.With equal rights for every humanbeing,no murders and wars.No oppression and poverty.Rightousness is the best garment,of all,and it goes for all of us.

    We are born with a free will.And I belive that tolerance and compassion,is among humans best features.

    That vers you write,I can not say,that it is not weird,and I dont know during wich situasion,this vers was necessery,but it can not be applied today.In any situation!

    Aggressors are transgresssors,in the Quran.

    What do you think?

  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #9 - April 04, 2009, 03:40 PM

    Nice post, you're a considerate & well meaning person  Afro

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #10 - April 04, 2009, 07:26 PM

    Aggressors are transgresssors,in the Quran.
    What do you think?


    While I do think that aggressions can often be justified using the Quran & some Muslims historically have & still support aggression using the Quran as their justification, its more important what Muslims think, the quality of a faith depends on its followers. Followers like you marleya, will certainly abstain from using any holy book to spread unholy terror! May your ranks grow in Islam!  Smiley

    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #11 - April 04, 2009, 08:40 PM

    + infinity

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #12 - April 04, 2009, 08:58 PM

    marleya wrote:

    "I dont know during wich situasion,this vers was necessery,but it can not be applied today.In any situation!"

    marleya here is apparently explicitly saying that there is no situation to justify the verse Rashna quoted from the Koran (9:5).

    However, perhaps marleya has not thought this through:  What about the following two situations (closely related to each other in some minds like, oh for example to pick a name out of a turban, Ibn Kathir):

    1) the situation where non-Muslims are attacking Muslims

    2) the situation where non-Muslims who enjoy more geopolitical power are interfering with Muslim societies and applying various sorts of pressure and cultural seductions that have the effect of inhibiting, or corrupting, the practice of Islam among many Muslims.

    Would not either, or both, of these situations justify verse 9:5 ?

    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #13 - April 04, 2009, 09:04 PM

    marleya wrote:

    "I dont know during wich situasion,this vers was necessery,but it can not be applied today.In any situation!"

    marleya here is apparently explicitly saying that there is no situation to justify the verse Rashna quoted from the Koran (9:5).

    However, perhaps marleya has not thought this through:  What about the following two situations (closely related to each other in some minds like, oh for example to pick a name out of a turban, Ibn Kathir):

    1) the situation where non-Muslims are attacking Muslims

    2) the situation where non-Muslims who enjoy more geopolitical power are interfering with Muslim societies and applying various sorts of pressure and cultural seductions that have the effect of inhibiting, or corrupting, the practice of Islam among many Muslims.

    Would not either, or both, of these situations justify verse 9:5 ?

    No, Marleya did not say that at all. What she actually said was that she did not know what circumstances at the time justified that verse.

    And you still can't use the quote button. Here, read this: http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?action=help;page=post#quote

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #14 - April 04, 2009, 09:06 PM

    Peace Rashna!

    Thank you too,for patience and good answers Smiley

    When I look at the world today Rashna,the variation among cultures and tradition,I can not see that God,ment that muslims should kill anybody,that dont belive in him.If I belive that God created all humans,how could I think that his message is to kill any, that do not belive in Islam?Or any that leave it?Humans will rebell,against totalitarian regimes,in the end,and it can never bring peace,to force people.It would be only endless wars,and its attrocities,and no future for human being and the world.
    I dont think muslims have to think about heaven,before life here on this earth,is paradise.With equal rights for every humanbeing,no murders and wars.No oppression and poverty.Rightousness is the best garment,of all,and it goes for all of us.

    We are born with a free will.And I belive that tolerance and compassion,is among humans best features.

    That vers you write,I can not say,that it is not weird,and I dont know during wich situasion,this vers was necessery,but it can not be applied today.In any situation!

    Aggressors are transgresssors,in the Quran.

    What do you think?


    Which leads to the next question: what can be considered an "aggression"?

    Killing Muslims?
    Threatening Muslims?
    Restricting Islam practices?
    Insulting Allah and/or His Prophet?
    Criticizing Islam or the Quran?

    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #15 - April 04, 2009, 09:13 PM

    Quote from: Tlaloc
    Insulting Allah and/or His Prophet?
    Criticizing Islam or the Quran?

    Drawing pictures of Mohammad?
    Being an independent woman?
    Being a GLBT person?
    Being an atheist?
    Being Jewish?
    Free speech?
    Plastic arts?
    Science?
    Chess?
    Music?

    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #16 - April 04, 2009, 09:17 PM

    Science?

    Pfft. Science is all in the Quran Tongue

    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #17 - April 04, 2009, 09:44 PM

    No, Marleya did not say that at all. What she actually said was that she did not know what circumstances at the time justified that verse.



    You are incorrect.  Marleya specifically said: 

    "but it can not be applied today.In any situation!"

    The word "today" applies to today, obviously, not to the ancient past "at the time".

    (Not only that, but I already quoted that statement of Marleya -- in the very same comment that you responded to incorrectly!)

    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #18 - April 04, 2009, 10:03 PM

    No, Marleya did not say that at all. What she actually said was that she did not know what circumstances at the time justified that verse.



    You are incorrect.  Marleya specifically said: 

    "but it can not be applied today.In any situation!"

    The word "today" applies to today, obviously, not to the ancient past "at the time".

    (Not only that, but I already quoted that statement of Marleya -- in the very same comment that you responded to incorrectly!)

    Yes, I realise that the word "today" applies to the present. I have never claimed otherwise. However you did quote Marleya out of context. She originally said this:

     
    That vers you write,I can not say,that it is not weird,and I dont know during wich situasion,this vers was necessery,but it can not be applied today.In any situation!

    In other words, she was saying that it must have been necessary at some point for some reason, but she does not know the circumstances or the reason.

    You then responded with this:

    marleya here is apparently explicitly saying that there is no situation to justify the verse Rashna quoted from the Koran (9:5).

    She did not say that at all. As I said, you were quoting her out of context. Now you can argue about the circumstances that applied at the time the verse was "revealed" but that is a different matter.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #19 - April 04, 2009, 10:48 PM

    osmanthus,

    At the very least, Marleya is ruling out all situations today where the verse can be justified.  On what basis would she do this? 

    And when she says that 9:5 is ruled out "today", does she open the possibility that perhaps tomorrow it will be justified again?  If so, on what basis and for what reasons?

    Methinks she is just tap-dancing in order to mollify the Infidels here (and it ain't that hard to pull the wool over the Infidel eyes here, I can see). 


    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #20 - April 04, 2009, 11:01 PM

    osmanthus,

    At the very least, Marleya is ruling out all situations today where the verse can be justified.  On what basis would she do this?

    You should ask her that. It's better than idly speculating about it. 

     
    Quote
    And when she says that 9:5 is ruled out "today", does she open the possibility that perhaps tomorrow it will be justified again?  If so, on what basis and for what reasons?

    Again, a question for Marleya.


    Quote
    Methinks she is just tap-dancing in order to mollify the Infidels here (and it ain't that hard to pull the wool over the Infidel eyes here, I can see).

    You can't see nearly as much as you seem to think you can see. It's always difficult to gain a broad perspective when one's head is firmly inserted in one's nether regions. It limits the view to a particularly grim form of tunnel vision.

    What Marleya is doing is trying to preserve her belief that Mohammed was a good man and the Quran is full of divine truth. Since she is a good person at heart she wants to believe that the religion she was raised with is good. You also should bear in mind that she was never raised with the hardcore Salafi version of Islam. She's from west Africa, which has always been different to Arabia.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #21 - April 05, 2009, 02:46 AM

    She's from west Africa, which has always been different to Arabia.


    You mean like Nigeria?

    1) December 12, 2008 -- Nigeria: Six Christian pastors killed, 40 churches razed in post-election attacks by Muslims

    http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=lead&lang=en&length=long&idelement=&backpage=&critere=&countryname=&rowcur=

    2) "...fears mounted last year after Datti Ahmed, a Kano physician who heads a prominent Muslim group, the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria, said polio vaccines were 'corrupted and tainted by evildoers from America and their Western allies.'"  Sounds like rampant xenophobia to me -- and putting countless children at risk over their irrational pathology.  I thought only white Western right-wingers had paranoid hatred of the "Other".

    http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/Features/0,,2-11-37_1481952,00.html

    3) May 14, 2004 -- Nigeria: Hundreds of Christians Die in Bloody Massacres

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/001945.php

    4) February 21, 2009 -- Nigeria: Muslims attack Christians, burn churches in retaliation for burned mosques

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024962.php

    5) October 12, 2007-- Nigeria: Muslims threaten to attack church

    ?Becoming Christians means permanent separation from their families if they must remain alive,? he said. ?If they return to their families they would certainly be killed.? Feel the love.

    "Nigeria: Muslim Threat To Attack Church Raises Tensions," from Compass Direct:

        MAIDUGURI, Nigeria, October 10 (Compass Direct News) ? Militant Islamists in this city in the northern state of Borno have sent three letters to a church warning that members would be attacked in the next few days, raising tensions where 50 Christians were killed and 57 churches destroyed last year.

    http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=news&lang=en&length=long&idelement=5070&backpage=&critere=&countryname=&rowcur=

    6) February 11, 2008 -- Nigeria: Three killed in riots over caricature of Muhammad -- three people killed over cartoons!!!

    7) June 29, 2006 -- Niger: Mob stones 20-year-old girl to death.  Her crime?  "distributing inciting leaflets... accusing both Prophet Muhammad, Jesus Christ and even some living and dead Pastors of some misdeeds." 

    Cool March 22, 2007 -- Muslim pupils beat teacher to death for desecrating Qur'an

    http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21426189-401,00.html

    I could multiply these kinds of mass pathology in Nigeria by dozens more.  And let us not forget the riots those "moderate" West Africans had over a journalist casually remarking that Mohammed would be attracted to Miss Universe -- riots where between 100 and 200 people were killed, and over 400 were injured:  over an insult to Mohammed!!!

    You can't have riots that kill upward of 200 people and injure over 400 without a mass pathology in a society -- particularly when you factor in the reason for the riots -- not over poverty or injustice (even then it would be problematic to say the least), but over a harmless insult to Mohammed!

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,71172,00.html

    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #22 - April 05, 2009, 02:51 AM

    Fox News  Cheesy Jihad Watch  Cheesy
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #23 - April 05, 2009, 02:57 AM

    Quote from: Hesperado
    I thought only white Western right-wingers had paranoid hatred of the "Other".


    What made you think such a ridiculous thing?  I realise from reading your posts that you are prone to thinking ridiculous things, but this one in particular, where did it come from?

    I can think of an excellent example of someone who is neither white, nor Western, nor right-wing (in the traditional sense), who exhibits a paranoid hatred of the other.  His name is Sheikh Hillaly, and his "other" is the female sex.

    As a personality type, you seem very like him, despite the difference in your ideologies.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #24 - April 05, 2009, 03:05 AM

    Yes Cheetah, I forgot that Leftists like you do allow for a tiny eensy-weensy minority of "extremists" being anti-liberal who are not white Western right-wing Christians and Zionists.

    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #25 - April 05, 2009, 03:08 AM

    Yes Cheetah, I forgot that Leftists like you do allow for a tiny eensy-weensy minority of "extremists" being anti-liberal who are not white Western right-wing Christians and Zionists.


    You have no idea what proportion of extremists I attribute to any race, country, religion or politics.  You just pulled that straight out of your ass, which doesn't really surprise me.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #26 - April 05, 2009, 04:03 AM

    Fascinating:  a subculture of anti-Islam ex-Muslims who deride and denigrate Jihad Watch.  I really had no idea this subculture existed prior to a couple of weeks ago when I joined this forum.  The only question now is how significant a population this actually is in numbers. 

    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #27 - April 05, 2009, 04:08 AM

    Fascinating:  a subculture of anti-Islam ex-Muslims who deride and denigrate Jihad Watch.  I really had no idea this subculture existed prior to a couple of weeks ago when I joined this forum.  The only question now is how significant a population this actually is in numbers. 


    I didn't think you were capable of questioning the significance of a population. How about you think about something like the significance of the population of extremist Muslims over moderate Muslims. It might help loosen your head, thus making it easier to pull out of your ass.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #28 - April 05, 2009, 04:22 AM

    Fascinating:  a subculture of anti-Islam ex-Muslims who deride and denigrate Jihad Watch.  I really had no idea this subculture existed prior to a couple of weeks ago when I joined this forum.  The only question now is how significant a population this actually is in numbers. 


    I'm sure that conundrum will keep you awake till the wee small hours. 

    Do you know what's even more fascinating?  This question - why would someone who openly espouses global apartheid between muslims and non-muslims ever post on an ex-muslims forum without expecting the same kind of reaction Sheikh Hillaly would get on a rape survivors forum?

    Why would someone who says that we cannot tell the difference, so therefore deport them all, expect people here to react with anything other than contempt?  You expect people to behave like turkeys voting for Christmas, when you have said openly that if you cannot tell the difference you will treat all as guilty?

    I've seen photos of some of the ex-muslims here, and some of them would look very deportable, by your clumsy, backwoods criteria.  In fact, all of them, other than the odd white ex-convert. 

    And no, btw, we don't particularly deride and denigrate Jihad Watch.  We just don't pay much attention to it, nor to the gullible fools who think it the epitome of reason on the subject of Islam.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Abrogation in the Quran
     Reply #29 - April 05, 2009, 05:33 AM

    I would expect ex-Muslims would support me, because they have been through the Hell of Muslim society, psychology and culture.  Instead, I get this very strange flack here from some ex-Muslims who want to defend the monsters they have escaped from.  Very peculiar.

    How can we tell the difference between harmless Muslims, and dangerous Muslims?
  • 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »