Islam, religion of peace – chapter and verse

The concept of and assertion that Islam is a religion of peace clash with reality. The following links (after the note) are to Quranic  verses shown at the Quranic Arabic Corpus, an annotated linguistic resource for the Holy Quran. The verses illustrate that the perception that Islam is a religion of peace is false.

Index

Preamble

Note, 2017 06 19: Update to replace the quotation marks enclosing what some people did not recognize where abstracts of the full verses from the Quran at the indicated links. The conscientious objectors stated that they did not, but for anyone similarly bothered, the excerpts shown are summations of the individual verses and are now shown in parentheses.

Someone may wonder why summations were made.  The reason is that the Internet source that the individual links lead to shows seven different translations into English of each verse, with each translation being a different English-language version of the Quran.  The meaning of the verses is the same, but the wording of each of the seven English-language versions of the translations of a given verse differs.  The summations in parentheses for each link reflect the meaning for all seven translations of a given verse.  The objection by some Muslim was that the summation is not a literal quote of a verse (he did not specify which one) of the version of the Quran he uses (he did not specify which edition he is using.) Therefore, he concluded, what is stated in this blog-post is incorrect.  Well, go figure, but I figure that the good Muslim is good at dissembling, which is true of very many of those I had discussions with.  All of them (there were many), with the exception of one who agreed that this blog-post is accurate, appear to suffer from a bad case of hatred of logic.

If anyone objects to the meaning of a given summation, worrying that a given summation not properly reflects what the instruction(s) in a corresponding verse state(s), by all means, feel free to point out what the specific error for a specific verse is taken to be.  However, you must then also show why your summation trumps the one that is shown and took considerable time construct, so as to catch the essence of all seven versions of each verse.

Quranic verses that instruct how to deal with infidels

  • Quran 2:191 (Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.)
  • Quran 2:193 (Fight the unbelievers until all of them have been converted to Islam.)
  • Quran 2:216 (You must fight for Allah, even if you don’t like doing so.)
  • Quran 3:169 (Those who were slain fighting for Allah will live forever and are looked after.)
  • Quran 3:28 (Muslims must not take the unbelievers as friends.)
  • Quran 3:85 (Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable.)
  • Quran 4:76 (Believers fight for Allah, non-believers fight for the Devil, therefore fight against the Devil’s allies.)
  • Quran 4:95 (Those who don’t fight and sit at home [except for the disabled] are outranked by those who fight for Allah.)
  • Quran 4:100 (Those who migrate for Allah will be given plenty, and if they should die in the process, it is incumbent on Allah to reward them.)
  • Quran 4:101 (It is no sin to shorten your prayers in foreign countries, for the unbelievers are most certainly forever your enemies.)
  • Quran 5:33 (Maim and crucify the unbelievers if they criticize Islam.)
  • Quran 5:51 (Do not take Jews and Christians as friends or allies.)
  • Quran 8:12 (Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Quran.)
  • Quran 8:60 (Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the unbelievers.)
  • Quran 8:65 (The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them.)
  • Quran 9:5 (When the opportunity arises kill the pagans wherever you catch them.)
  • Quran 9:29 (Fight the unbelievers until they pay tribute or have been humbled.)
  • Quran 9:30 (The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah “; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” They are deluded; destroy them.)
  • Quran 9:123 (Make war on the unbelievers living in your neighbourhood.  Allah will be with you for it.)
  • Quran 22:19 (The unbelievers will be punished with garments of fire, and  boiling water shall be poured upon their heads.)
  • Quran 47:4 (Do not hanker for peace with the unbelievers; behead them and ransom the rest until the holy war against the unbelievers is over.)
  • Quran 98:6 (Unbelievers and polytheist will fry in Hell.  They are the worst of creatures.)

That should explain what is happening, but if you think that you need more evidence, look here for more references: “Fitna the movie”   From that source, a few more citations:

  • Quran 4:56 (We will burn unbelievers and give them new skins every time their skins are consumed by the fire, time and again, as often as their skins are consumed by the fire.)
  • Quran 4:89 (Do not take friends from amongst the unbelievers, but, if they turn their backs, slay them wherever you find them.)
  • Quran 8:39 (Fight the unbelievers until all have been converted to Islam.)
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule.

The Quran teaches that to commit violence against infidels will bring great rewards from Allah.  (click on the image to go to the source)

The Quran contains contradictions

There are some contradictions between what early chapters (those that were written early in the Prophet’s life) specify about the obligation of Muslims to be tolerant of the religions of others, and later exhortations (written late or toward the end of his life) that are far more aggressive and even deadly toward and intolerant of other religions.  Gregory M. Davis, a scholar of Islam, explains those contradiction like this:

Those Westerners who manage to pick up a translation of the Quran are often left bewildered as to its meaning thanks to ignorance of a critically important principle of Quranic interpretation known as “abrogation.” The principle of abrogation — al-naskh wa al-mansukh (the abrogating and the abrogated) — directs that verses revealed later in Muhammad’s career “abrogate” — i.e., cancel and replace — earlier ones whose instructions they may contradict. Thus, passages revealed later in Muhammad’s career, in Medina, overrule passages revealed earlier, in Mecca. The Quran itself lays out the principle of abrogation:

2:106. Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We {Allah} abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things?

__________
More at Islam 101, 1. The Basics, b. The Quran — the Book of Allah.
Unfortunately, the text does not have a linked index, but when you get to the web page, do a “Find in Page” (hit <Ctrl> + <f>) and enter: abrogation.  That will take you right to the place in the text where the quote shown above is located.

Mohammed’s response to the question directed at him is of course a non-sequitur, but it is an effective diversion whose veracity became a matter of faith, and who can possible argue with the infallible messenger of Allah?

At any rate, the earlier, more moderate, peaceful tolerance toward other religions led to the widespread misperception that Islam is a religion of peace, whereas the hard and cold reality is that Muslims follow the doctrines of Islam according to the very latest words of the Prophet, and that does not at all mean that Islam is a religion of peace.  Gregory M. Davis puts it like this:

In order to find out what the Quran says on a given topic, it is necessary to examine the other Islamic sources that give clues as to when in Muhammad’s lifetime the revelations occurred. Upon such examination, one discovers that the Meccan suras, revealed at a time when the Muslims were vulnerable, are generally benign; the later Medinan suras, revealed after Muhammad had made himself the head of an army, are bellicose.
___________
More at Islam 101
, 1. The Basics, b. The Quran — the Book of Allah.
Unfortunately, the text does not have a linked index, but when you get to the web page, do a “Find in Page” (hit <Ctrl> + <f>) and enter: It seems that 2:106 .  That will take you right to the place in the text where the quote shown above is located.

Islam goes by the latest words of the Prophet.  Those are “bellicose,” and that is why Islam is not and cannot be a religion of peace.

Jihad, to fight for Allah, is obligatory for Muslims

Jihad

Jihad, the struggle in the way of Allah, has several aspects: struggle with oneself to live in the way of Allah; struggle to enlighten others as to the nature of Islam and the desirability of conversion; and armed struggle against the enemies of Islam.

The first two interpretations govern the conduct of jihad for the vast majority of Muslims, but for the jihadi, armed struggle is the “forgotten obligation” of Islam and should predominate.
There are two kinds of armed struggle, or holy war, in Islam. Offensive jihad is war against infidels beyond the realm of Islam. Indeed, that part of the world is called the “abode of war” (dar al-Harb). This form of jihad is a collective obligation of the Islamic community and must be declared by an appropriate authority, e.g., a caliph.   Not everyone is expected to participate in such a jihad.

Defensive jihad is waged when Muslim territory is attacked or occupied, or when Islam itself is threatened. This form of jihad is an individual duty, and it is incumbent on everyone to combat such enemies or occupiers. As spelled out in Chapter Five,  jihadis insist that Islam and Muslims are under attack everywhere—hence the argument that waging jihad is every Muslim’s personal obligation.

For those who cannot fight, there is financial jihad (boycotts); “jihad of the tongue” (propaganda); and even political jihad (engaging in elections), although the latter is highly controversial in violent jihadi circles.

Source: IN THEIR OWN WORDS: Voices of Jihad, Compilation and Commentary
    By David Aaron
    Published 2008 by the RAND Corporation
    http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG602.pdf
    p. 81

See also what the section on Jihad in the book reports on the Islamic stance on the subjects Terrorism (p. 86) and Martyrdom (p. 87) as well as “Pillars of Islam“.

Does the Islamic Jihad differ from Islamic terrorism?

None of the different versions of the Quran are quite clear on that.  They all agree that infidels or kafirs (“unbelievers” or “disbelievers”) must be treated badly, with the scale of which that is to be done being perhaps the only difference between the two.  Nevertheless, that hardly makes a difference to a given target of either.  Moreover, both, the Islamic Jihad and Islamic terrorism, do not employ rules for how to prevent or avoid collateral damage.  The reader of this is encouraged to study the Quran and associated scriptures, so as to discover specific instructions that may universally apply and prohibit the infliction of collateral damage when and where the verses of the Quran call for maltreatment of infidels or kafirs.

As to specific actions regarding maltreatment of infidels or kafirs, differences between Islamic Jihad and Islamic terrorism appear to be missing.  There is a difference between the scale of both, with Islamic Jihad being all-out war for Islamic conquest of the non-Islamic world.  Still, even there, the distinction is somewhat blurred, as for instance with ISIS, terrorism and terrorist acts are permissible and even encouraged, provided a Jihad was declared by a caliph, which ISIS asserts it has been.  In other words, once a Jihad has been declared, all things are fair, and those who do not agree, even if they are Muslims, will suffer the consequences.

Mind you, the Quran is quite clear on that no Muslim must ever kill another Muslim.  Although it is obvious that they do, as evidenced by many instances of that happening without any second thoughts, even in wars of substantial magnitude (e. g.: the Iran-Iraq war, from 22 September 1980, when Iraq invaded Iran, to August 1988), the Quran, verse 4:92, expressively prohibits doing so, and proper compensation must be made in each instance where such a killing happens by mistake (one must wonder what the penalties are when the killing is deliberate):

Sahih International: And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake – then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased’s family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer – then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty – then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] – then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah. And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise. —Quran, 4:92

Is there a corresponding penalty for a Muslim killing an infidel or a kafir by mistake, say, perhaps an appropriate amount of fasting, such as skipping breakfast for the killing of one or a whole row of them in the case of a bomb blast that killed dozens of innocent infidel men, women and children?  Of course, there isn’t.  The verses indicated above make clear the justification for the belief that Allah will reward the killing of infidels, which is quite possibly the reason why that continues to become an ever more popular pastime of increasing numbers of jihadis.

However verse 4:92 just covers when a Muslim kills a Muslim by mistake, what if it the killing was done on purpose and was no mistake? Well, that is another story.

Sahih International: But whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment. —Quran 4.93

That is pretty harsh and should stop all inter-sectarian killing among Muslims, help to make it a religion of peace, right?  Well, obviously not. It is only necessary to declare the intended victim to be an unbeliever, and all is good. In the case of a war, the other side will do the converse, and the fight is on, the killings then all legal and morally permissible, even desirable.

In other words, might makes right, and if a Muslim rationalizes that coercing someone to become a member of the selected version of the Islamic faith is alright, because he thinks that his version of the Islamic religion is the one that will save him, he doesn’t have to worry about anything being wrong with cutting the intended convertee’s head off or to blow him to bits.  If he is a Muslim, the attacker first has to inconvenience himself by declaring his intended victim an unbeliever.  If he then kills him, he has ensured that Allah will smile upon him.

If you are on the receiving end of the violence, don’t argue with anyone who points a weapon at you and has his finger on the trigger or his knife at your throat, especially not when he is convinced that he is acting for Allah, even if Muslims from other Islamic factions may say that the man with the gun or the woman with the  suicide vest is not doing the right thing.  Whether Islam is a religion of peace will be the last thing on your mind.  Besides, it is likely that the one who disagrees nevertheless contributed some of the money required to acquire that gun or the materials and the C4 for the suicide vest — they buy that by the tonne, you know.

A Muslim who is unable to actively participate in the maltreatment of infidels or kafirs is obligated to make the required contributions to the funds needed to acquire those weapons and to cover the expenses of feeding, housing and training of jihadis. It is a communal responsibility, and the donations for that are being collected by the mosques. The Quran and its associated scripture say so, and that is what counts, not the local laws that prohibit terrorist acts, conspiring to commit them or the making of financial or any other contributions to aid their commission.  Allah’s word is greatest.

Can Islam be made a religion of peace?

There will always be those who, all evidence to the contrary, cling to the belief that Islam is a religion of peace, or that at the very least it can be made to be a religion of peace.  Gregory M. Davis states:

As should be plain to anyone who has examined the Islamic sources, to take the violence out of Islam would require it to jettison two things: the Quran as the word of Allah and Muhammad as Allah’s prophet. In other words, to pacify Islam would require its transformation into something that it is not…..
The unhappy fact is that Islam today is what it has been fourteen centuries: violent, intolerant, and expansionary. It is folly to think that we, in the course of a few years or decades, are going to be able to change the basic world outlook of a foreign civilization. Islam’s violent nature must be accepted as given; only then will we be able to come up with appropriate policy responses that can improve our chances of survival.
Islam 101 4. Frequently Asked Questions — d. Could an Islamic “Reformation” pacify Islam?
_________
Again, the text at that link for the source of the text containing the preceding quote does have an index, but the entries in the index are not linked.  Nevertheless, the location of the preceding quote from the text can be found quite easily by using copy and paste commands.  When accessing the web page, do a “Find in Page” (hit <Ctrl> + <f>) and enter: Could an Islamic “Reformation” pacify Islam?
That will take you right to the place in the text where the text in the quote shown above is located.

This entry was posted in Books & Films, Islam and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.