Do Not Bash Muslims

[JosephZ]

So if one scholar says the topic of abrogation is contentious, he is right. But that does not mean abrogation is a mystery to the Islamic sources, or that it cannot be understood or identified. Most of the best Islamic scholars agree on most of verses that are abrogated.

setst wrote:
Your understanding is myth – not in accordance with the best Islamic scholarship and Sahih Hadith.

Once again, Abrogation is one of the lengthiest, most complex, and most important topics in both the science of Qur’anic exegesis [tafsir] as well as that of Legal Theory [usul al-fiqh]. Imam Suyuti mentions that a countless number of scholars authored works solely on the topic of abrogation, and that many Imams said, “No one is allowed to give explanation [tafsir] of the Book of Allah until they understand abrogation.” Our Master Ali [may Allah ennoble his face] asked a judge if he knew which verses abrogated others, to which the judge replied that he did not. Imam Ali said, “You are ruined, and you have ruined others.” [Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an]

The theory of naskh [Abrogation] has been dealt with by many. The editorial remarks of Qatadah’s Kitab al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.10–8) for instance, listed over seventy names of those who have written solely on naskh (both classical and contemporary), while Abu ‘Ubayd’s alNasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.59–76) on the other hand, listed some thirty-nine names. Despite the numerous writings, or perhaps because of them, naskh remains a problematic theory, if not a difficult and divisive one (Mustafa Zaud, 1963: v.1, 4).

You don't know what roughly 90% of the world's Muslims believe or understand.

I know that 90% of the world's Muslims reject the Salafi/Wahhabist sect of Islam that you are describing in this thread.

Many Christians? No, I am unfamiliar with them. I have never seen a Christian dress like Jesus in everyday life, as Muslims dress like Muhammad as we see in Islamic countries and even here in the West.

You need to travel more

the article goes on to say that Christians in those countries are persecuted, and family members may even kill their own if they become Christian. This is in contrast to how you explain that Muslims you met as friendly:

Missionaries and Christian organizations say the same thing about Christian persecution here in Mindanao as well.

Here's a video telling the story of a former Muslim who became a Christian pastor and was later killed.

Especially affected by persecution are the islands of Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi where Christian converts are vastly outnumbered by a majority population of Muslims. The main source of persecution in Mindanao is Islamic extremism, which especially targets Muslim background believers from the Islamic Sama and Tausug people groups. Those people are famous as “Sea Gypsies”, and they live mainly on Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi islands, though many have now migrated to the region’s main island,

Areas of the Philippine island of Mindanao are descending into the same sort of anti-Christian persecution witnessed in Iraq, an Italian missionary priest has reported.

Fr Sebastiano D’Ambra is the founder of the Silsilah movement which since 1984 has promoted interreligious dialogue along with members of the Muslim community.

“In some areas of Mindanao we are experiencing exactly the same thing as is happening in Iraq,” Fr D’Ambra said, speaking after anti-Christian attacks in southern Mindanao on Christmas Day.
Religious persecution – is Mindanao the new Iraq? | The Catholic Weekly

And check this one out.

Here is how a Christian persecution website reported the story.

Jihadists attack Christian majority city, Zamboanga, in Southern part of Philippine, rendering 60,000 Christians without home... This massive attack has left about 60,000 Christians to flee from their homes. They have been forced to live as refugees now.

What is more, international media has turned a blind eye to this incident. Thousands of Christians have been left stranded as a result of this attack. No one has even highlighted their plight.

Muslim rebels held thousands of residents of these areas captives, for a period of six days. The coastal villages in the south came under attack by these Islamic rebels.

As a result of these attacks, the Islamic extremists killed about 56 people while about 60,000 local Christians were forced to leave their homes.

The problem with the above article is that it isn't true. While the city this event took place in is a predominantly Christian city, it wasn't Christians who were displaced; although there were some. The six villages where the fighting took place were Muslim villages and while some Christians live in these villages, the population would be 5% or less. How do I know this? Because the people group I primarily work with live in the area affected by the siege mentioned in the article and I have been visiting those villages before and after this event took place. Based on my own observation, the number of Christians found in the refugee camps following the siege was around 5% with another 5% being animists, and the remaining being Muslim. I have provided a few of links from local sources related to this story that also show the truth.

5 years after Zamboanga siege, Muslim community picks up pieces

Zamboanga City standoff not a religious war

In Zamboanga City, the Department of Social Welfare and Development’s operations center reported that 62,329 persons are now staying in 20 evacuation centers in the city.

“A lot of people, about 90 percent Muslims, are suffering from this man-made calamity that Misuari is answerable for,” Hataman said. Hataman warned residents of Zamboanga City and Mindanao in general not to be misled by deceptive tactics aimed at driving deeper the wedge between Muslims and Christians. “We need to be informed properly and not to believe in deceptions,” he said.

When events like this happen in far flung parts of the world, it's easy for media outlets and organizations that report on Christian persecution to misrepresent the facts to further their agendas. Not all are guilty of intentionally publishing misleading information of course, but many are. Sometimes they rely on second hand information from sources they believe to be reliable and run with a story without doing any fact checking, in cases like that, they would not be at fault.

Christian persecution does occur in Mindanao, but reports about it are often exaggerated or events that are reported as persecution have nothing at all to do with Christians being killed for their faith.

As for Maluso, this is a very tiny area on a tiny Island. Do you have any experiences in other Islamic countries?

This sentence in my earlier reply to you should have given you a hint that I have.

My knowledge of Islam goes back to the 1980's while in the Military. It was at that time that I had to take courses in Islamic Studies before I was assigned to an Islamic country

And this one to the OP earlier in the thread.

For the past 7+ years I've been serving as a missionary in Muslim communities primarily in Mindanao (Although this has extended into Malaysia and Indonesia from time to time) and living in a majority Muslim village in Davao City.

In all I have spent a considerable amount of time in five Muslim majority countries on three continents, and my missionary work here in Mindanao is exclusively carried out in Muslim majority communities.

 

[JosephZ]

"Once the sacred months have passed," that was the end of all truces with the unbelievers. The rest of Chapter 9 is a continuation of the context. The last command of Allah through Muhammad is Chapter 9 according to most Islamic scholars. Muhammad died a year later. The command of Chapter 9 is kill and subjugate the non-believers, Jews and Christians until the whole world is Muslim.

The Qur'an although written at a point in time is to be followed from that point forward - every command given. This is true unless abrogated by Allah.

Allah did not abrogate chapter 9, so the command to kill and subjugate unbeliever stands today - according to all the best scholars of Islam interpretation.

Qur'an 9 starts by saying "A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty."

Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

The verse in Chapter 9 where it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them" is referring to a very specific group of non-Muslims (Those which Muhammad had made a treaty with) at a specific point in history. It was not talking about all non-Muslims and those commands were not addressed to Muslims living in 2019. This really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.

Now let's start at the beginning of Chapter 9 so we can see which polytheists are being talked about.

1. A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty.

4. Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill the treaty with them to the end of its term. God loves the righteous.

As seen in these two verses, it's not talking about all polytheists. Since verse 4 says "Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you," then this automatically tells us that some of the polytheists have broken their treaties.

7. How can there be a treaty with the polytheists on the part of God and His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque? As long as they are upright with you, be upright with them. God loves the pious.

8. How? Whenever they overcome you, they respect neither kinship nor treaty with you. They satisfy you with lip service, but their hearts refuse, and most of them are immoral.

10. Towards a believer they respect neither kinship nor treaty. These are the transgressors.

In the above verses we again see a distinction between polytheists, Those who upheld their treaties (Verse 7) and those who didn't respect their treaties (Verses 8 & 9). Those who didn't keep their treaties are the transgressors.

13. Will you not fight a people who violated their oaths, and planned to exile the Messenger, and initiated hostilities against you? Do you fear them? It is God you should fear, if you are believers.

The above question wouldn't have been asked had there not been polytheists who had already broken their treaty. So when you read verse 5:

When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way. God is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.

When it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them," it's obvious that it's only talking about those who have already broken their treaties, and not all polytheists.

Now let's look at Qur'an 5:3:

Prohibited for you are carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, and animals dedicated to other than God; also the flesh of animals strangled, killed violently, killed by a fall, gored to death, mangled by wild animals—except what you rescue, and animals sacrificed on altars; and the practice of drawing lots. For it is immoral. Today, those who disbelieve have despaired of your religion, so do not fear them, but fear Me. Today I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My favor upon you, and have approved Islam as a religion for you. But whoever is compelled by hunger, with no intent of wrongdoing—God is Forgiving and Merciful.

This verse was supposedly revealed to Muhammad when Islam had finally developed into a complete way of life for Muslims and is referred to as the Ikmal al-Din or "perfection of the religion" in English. This verse says that non-Muslims had now reached a point of no hope in destroying Islam and it tells Muslims that they no longer needed to fear non-Muslims; they should only fear God. This verse is considered by most Muslims to be the final verse revealed to Muhammad and in essence it tells Muslims that non-Muslims are no longer a treat to them.

There is a consensus among Islamic scholars is that Qur'an 5:3 was revealed to Muhammad at Arafat on his farewell pilgrimage which occurs after what is written in chapter nine.

(This day have I perfected your religion for you…) [5:3]. This verse was revealed on Friday, on the Day of ‘Arafah, at the farewell pilgrimage, after ‘Asr prayer in the tenth year of the Hijrah while the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, was present in ‘Arafat on the back of his camel al-‘Adba’. ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Hamdan al-‘Adl informed us> Ahmad ibn Ja‘far al-Qati‘i> ‘Abd Allah ibn Ahmad> his father> Ja‘far ibn ‘Awn> Abu ‘Umays> Qays ibn Muslim> Tariq ibn Shihab who said: “A Jewish man went to ‘Umar ibn alKhattab, may Allah be well pleased with him, and said: ‘O leader of the believers, you recite one verse in your Scripture which, if it had been revealed to us, we would have taken the day in which it was revealed as a day of celebration’. ‘Which verse is this?’ asked ‘Umar. He said: ‘It is (This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you…)’. ‘Umar said: ‘By Allah, I know the day in which it was revealed to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, and the hour in which it was revealed to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and his family and give him peace. It was revealed on Friday, in the afternoon of the day of ‘Arafah’ ”. This was narrated by Bukhari from al-Hasan ibn Sabah and also by Muslim from ‘Abd ibn Humayd, and Ibn Sabah and Ibn Humayd related it from Ja‘far ibn ‘Awn. AlHakim Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Shadhyakhi informed us> Zahir ibn Ahmad> al-Husayn ibn Nuhammad ibn Mus‘ab> Yahya ibn Hakim> Abu Qutaybah> Hammad> ‘Ammar ibn Abi ‘Ammar: “Ibn ‘Abbas recited this verse in the presence of a Jewish man, and the latter said: ‘If this verse was revealed to us, we would have taken the day in which it was revealed as a celebration day’. Ibn ‘Abbas said: ‘Well, it was revealed in two days of celebration which coincided with each other: it was a Friday which coincided with the day of ‘Arafah’. -- Asbāb al-Nuzūl By: Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wāhidī

(This day) the day of the pilgrimage (have I perfected your religion for you) I have elucidated to you the prescriptions of your religion: the lawful and the unlawful, the commands and the prohibitions (and completed My favour unto you) I have completed My blessing upon you in that, after today, no idolater will ever gather with you in 'Arafat, Mina, in the circumambulation around the Ka'bah, and in the coming and going between al-Safa and al-Marwah, (and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam.-- Abbas - Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs

And on the Day of ‘Arafa in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage, the following was revealed:Today the disbelievers have despaired of your religion, of you apostatising from it, having hoped for it [earlier], for now they perceived its strength; therefore do not fear them, but fear Me. Today I have perfected your religion for you, that is, its rulings and obligations (after this [verse] nothing about [what is] lawful or unlawful was revealed) and I have completed My favour upon you, by perfecting it [your religion], but it is also said by [effecting] their safe entry into Mecca; and I have approved, chosen, Islam for you as religion. -- Jalal - Al-Jalalayn

`Umar replied, `By Allah! I know when and where this verse was revealed to Allah's Messenger. It was the evening on the Day of `Arafah on a Friday.''' Al-Bukhari recorded this Hadith through Al-Hasan bin As-Sabbah from Ja`far bin `Awn. Muslim, At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa'i also recorded this Hadith. In the narration collected by Al-Bukhari in the book of Tafsir, through Tariq, he said, "The Jews said to `Umar, `By Allah! There is a verse that is read by all of you (Muslims), and had it been revealed to us, we would have taken that day (on which it was revealed) as a day of celebration.' `Umar said, `By Allah! I know when and where this verse was revealed and where the Messenger of Allah was at that time. It was the day of `Arafah, and I was at `Arafah, by Allah.''-- Kathir - Ibn Al Kathir

Authentic traditions show that this declaration was revealed on the occasion of the last Hajj performed by the Holy Prophet in A.H. 10. I am however of the opinion that it was at first revealed in A.H. 6 close after the treaty of Hudaibiyah as a part of this discourse, but was again sent down to the Holy Prophet for its declaration on that suitable occasion. This is because this verse is so well knit in this context that it would be incomplete without it, Therefore it cannot Be imagined that it was inserted here afterwards when it was revealed in A.H. 10. I believe (and the real knowledge is with Allah) that at the time of its revelation in this context its real significance was not realized, therefore in A.H. 10, when the whole of Arabia was subdued and the power of Islam reached its zenith, Allah again sent down these sentences to His Prophet for their declaration on the occasion of his last Hajj. -- Maududi - Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

QuranX.com The most complete Quran / Hadith / Tafsir collection available!
https://www.altafsir.com/Books/Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi.pdf

Since Qur'an 5:3 is considered to be the final revelation to Muhammad, using your own theory of abrogation and how the verses revealed later in Muhammad's life override previous ones, the war between Muslims and non-Muslims is over. That verse tells Muslims that non-Muslims have lost hope in the fight against Islam and that Muslims no longer need to fear them.

 

[setst777]

Qur'an 9 starts by saying "A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty."

Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

The verse in Chapter 9 where it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them" is referring to a very specific group of non-Muslims (Those which Muhammad had made a treaty with) at a specific point in history. It was not talking about all non-Muslims and those commands were not addressed to Muslims living in 2019. This really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.

Now let's start at the beginning of Chapter 9 so we can see which polytheists are being talked about.

1. A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty.

4. Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill the treaty with them to the end of its term. God loves the righteous.

As seen in these two verses, it's not talking about all polytheists. Since verse 4 says "Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you," then this automatically tells us that some of the polytheists have broken their treaties.

7. How can there be a treaty with the polytheists on the part of God and His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque? As long as they are upright with you, be upright with them. God loves the pious.

8. How? Whenever they overcome you, they respect neither kinship nor treaty with you. They satisfy you with lip service, but their hearts refuse, and most of them are immoral.

10. Towards a believer they respect neither kinship nor treaty. These are the transgressors.

In the above verses we again see a distinction between polytheists, Those who upheld their treaties (Verse 7) and those who didn't respect their treaties (Verses 8 & 9). Those who didn't keep their treaties are the transgressors.

13. Will you not fight a people who violated their oaths, and planned to exile the Messenger, and initiated hostilities against you? Do you fear them? It is God you should fear, if you are believers.

The above question wouldn't have been asked had there not been polytheists who had already broken their treaty. So when you read verse 5:

When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way. God is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.

When it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them," it's obvious that it's only talking about those who have already broken their treaties, and not all polytheists.

Now let's look at Qur'an 5:3:

Prohibited for you are carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, and animals dedicated to other than God; also the flesh of animals strangled, killed violently, killed by a fall, gored to death, mangled by wild animals—except what you rescue, and animals sacrificed on altars; and the practice of drawing lots. For it is immoral. Today, those who disbelieve have despaired of your religion, so do not fear them, but fear Me. Today I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My favor upon you, and have approved Islam as a religion for you. But whoever is compelled by hunger, with no intent of wrongdoing—God is Forgiving and Merciful.

This verse was supposedly revealed to Muhammad when Islam had finally developed into a complete way of life for Muslims and is referred to as the Ikmal al-Din or "perfection of the religion" in English. This verse says that non-Muslims had now reached a point of no hope in destroying Islam and it tells Muslims that they no longer needed to fear non-Muslims; they should only fear God. This verse is considered by most Muslims to be the final verse revealed to Muhammad and in essence it tells Muslims that non-Muslims are no longer a treat to them.

There is a consensus among Islamic scholars is that Qur'an 5:3 was revealed to Muhammad at Arafat on his farewell pilgrimage which occurs after what is written in chapter nine.

(This day have I perfected your religion for you…) [5:3]. This verse was revealed on Friday, on the Day of ‘Arafah, at the farewell pilgrimage, after ‘Asr prayer in the tenth year of the Hijrah while the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, was present in ‘Arafat on the back of his camel al-‘Adba’. ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Hamdan al-‘Adl informed us> Ahmad ibn Ja‘far al-Qati‘i> ‘Abd Allah ibn Ahmad> his father> Ja‘far ibn ‘Awn> Abu ‘Umays> Qays ibn Muslim> Tariq ibn Shihab who said: “A Jewish man went to ‘Umar ibn alKhattab, may Allah be well pleased with him, and said: ‘O leader of the believers, you recite one verse in your Scripture which, if it had been revealed to us, we would have taken the day in which it was revealed as a day of celebration’. ‘Which verse is this?’ asked ‘Umar. He said: ‘It is (This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you…)’. ‘Umar said: ‘By Allah, I know the day in which it was revealed to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, and the hour in which it was revealed to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and his family and give him peace. It was revealed on Friday, in the afternoon of the day of ‘Arafah’ ”. This was narrated by Bukhari from al-Hasan ibn Sabah and also by Muslim from ‘Abd ibn Humayd, and Ibn Sabah and Ibn Humayd related it from Ja‘far ibn ‘Awn. AlHakim Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Shadhyakhi informed us> Zahir ibn Ahmad> al-Husayn ibn Nuhammad ibn Mus‘ab> Yahya ibn Hakim> Abu Qutaybah> Hammad> ‘Ammar ibn Abi ‘Ammar: “Ibn ‘Abbas recited this verse in the presence of a Jewish man, and the latter said: ‘If this verse was revealed to us, we would have taken the day in which it was revealed as a celebration day’. Ibn ‘Abbas said: ‘Well, it was revealed in two days of celebration which coincided with each other: it was a Friday which coincided with the day of ‘Arafah’. -- Asbāb al-Nuzūl By: Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wāhidī

(This day) the day of the pilgrimage (have I perfected your religion for you) I have elucidated to you the prescriptions of your religion: the lawful and the unlawful, the commands and the prohibitions (and completed My favour unto you) I have completed My blessing upon you in that, after today, no idolater will ever gather with you in 'Arafat, Mina, in the circumambulation around the Ka'bah, and in the coming and going between al-Safa and al-Marwah, (and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam.-- Abbas - Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs

And on the Day of ‘Arafa in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage, the following was revealed:Today the disbelievers have despaired of your religion, of you apostatising from it, having hoped for it [earlier], for now they perceived its strength; therefore do not fear them, but fear Me. Today I have perfected your religion for you, that is, its rulings and obligations (after this [verse] nothing about [what is] lawful or unlawful was revealed) and I have completed My favour upon you, by perfecting it [your religion], but it is also said by [effecting] their safe entry into Mecca; and I have approved, chosen, Islam for you as religion. -- Jalal - Al-Jalalayn

`Umar replied, `By Allah! I know when and where this verse was revealed to Allah's Messenger. It was the evening on the Day of `Arafah on a Friday.''' Al-Bukhari recorded this Hadith through Al-Hasan bin As-Sabbah from Ja`far bin `Awn. Muslim, At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa'i also recorded this Hadith. In the narration collected by Al-Bukhari in the book of Tafsir, through Tariq, he said, "The Jews said to `Umar, `By Allah! There is a verse that is read by all of you (Muslims), and had it been revealed to us, we would have taken that day (on which it was revealed) as a day of celebration.' `Umar said, `By Allah! I know when and where this verse was revealed and where the Messenger of Allah was at that time. It was the day of `Arafah, and I was at `Arafah, by Allah.''-- Kathir - Ibn Al Kathir

Authentic traditions show that this declaration was revealed on the occasion of the last Hajj performed by the Holy Prophet in A.H. 10. I am however of the opinion that it was at first revealed in A.H. 6 close after the treaty of Hudaibiyah as a part of this discourse, but was again sent down to the Holy Prophet for its declaration on that suitable occasion. This is because this verse is so well knit in this context that it would be incomplete without it, Therefore it cannot Be imagined that it was inserted here afterwards when it was revealed in A.H. 10. I believe (and the real knowledge is with Allah) that at the time of its revelation in this context its real significance was not realized, therefore in A.H. 10, when the whole of Arabia was subdued and the power of Islam reached its zenith, Allah again sent down these sentences to His Prophet for their declaration on the occasion of his last Hajj. -- Maududi - Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

QuranX.com The most complete Quran / Hadith / Tafsir collection available!
https://www.altafsir.com/Books/Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi.pdf

Since Qur'an 5:3 is considered to be the final revelation to Muhammad, using your own theory of abrogation and how the verses revealed later in Muhammad's life override previous ones, the war between Muslims and non-Muslims is over. That verse tells Muslims that non-Muslims have lost hope in the fight against Islam and that Muslims no longer need to fear them.

Hi Joseph,

You have attempted to supply your own interpretation to the Qur'an, and apparently using sources to help you, that do not teach what you are trying to force the verses to say. You have some truths mixed with half-truths and missed meanings and false conclusions because you fail to understand the history.

You have to go to Islamic sources to find out the order and the meaning and history behind those individual verses, which were not all revealed that the same time, or under the same circumstances, and not all are in chronological order.

Try reading the following Islamic source to gain a better understanding...
Section 1: Immunity Declared

Once you understand all the verses in Chapter 9 correctly, then you will see that Muhammad, as well as the Rightly Guided Caliphs (Rashidun - Wikipedia) fulfilled Qur'an 9:29 as Allah meant it to be understood, and of which the Hadith confirm.

There was a different set of rules for non-Muslims (unbelievers, apostates and hypocrites) as is clearly and repeatedly commanded and taught throughout the Qur'an, the Hadith, the Sira, and the most reliable Tafsir.

Chapter 9:29 is the last command of Allah through Muhammad regarding the non-Muslims.

How did Muhammad, the prophet of Allah, and the Rightly Guided Caliphs understand 9:29?

We have a whole history of Islamic conquest from Muhammad to the times of the Rightly Guided Caliphs to see Islams intent: Within a little over 100 years 2/3 of Europe of destroyed and put under Islamic control before they were finally stopped. The whole world was the Goal of Islam.

Within Muhammad’s lifetime the whole of the Arabian Peninsula was conquered.

And, in following with Muhamad’s command to fight unbelievers where ever you find them and conquer the world for Islam, within 120 years after his death, Islam conquered lands stretching all the way to China on one end and the Atlantic Ocean on the other side.. Their conquests include. . .

Conquest of Syria: 634–641
Conquest of Egypt: 639–642
Conquest of Mesopotamia and Persia: 633–651
Conquest of Sindh (India): 711–714
Conquest of the Maghreb (NE Libya): 647–742
Conquest of Spain and Septimania: 711–721
Conquest of Transoxiana (modern-day Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and parts of Kazakhstan): 673–751

Islam was to conquer the world for Allah by the command of Muhammad in the Quran.

Qur'an 61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and His Messenger Muhammad) hate (it). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur’an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996)

The historical context of 61:9 is battle and warfare according to the Hadith. And that is how the Rightly Guided Caliphs understood the orders of Muhammad, which is why they were conquering the world for Islam.

Qur'an 9:29 – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” “People of the Book” refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse 9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has charted them to make Islam “superior over all religions.” This chapter was one of the final “revelations” from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad’s companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

Can you imagine over 270 million people slaughtered by Islam in its 1400 years of conquest (which includes all those Africans who died on Muslim slave ships).

Millions more women and children from good families in civilized societies, most of whom saw their husbands, daddies and mothers, relatives and friends slaughtered and lives torn apart, many being Christian or Jewish, turned into sex slaves to be sold on the market repeatedy, or kept as pets to be raped over and over again by the cult that tortured, killed and enslaved their family, burned their homes down, destroyed their lives and their country. This is all under the teaching of Allah in the Qur'an.

Muhammad’s mandate for war against the world until the world becomes Islam has not changed to this very day. The only force holding them back is the West.

In Islam, there can be no new law or command that supersedes what Muhammad commanded. Why? Because, according to Islam, Muhammad is the last prophet. That is why all fundamental Muslims are Jihadists bent on destroying the West. Here is how Muhammad taught Islam how to do this…

1) Enter a country proclaiming to peaceful and a religion of peace and tolerance.

2) After gaining more in number, influence using Taqyah socio-political environment to favor Muslims, create protests, demonstrations, unrest, terrorism, killings.

3) Once gaining a foothold, then they are to subdue, conquer, torture, kill and enslave the very country that gave them refuge unless they repent after hearing the message of Allah.

4) Kill all unbelievers, hypocrites and apostates, take all their property, and capture their children as sex slaves and, if a male children submit to Islam then they are to be recruited into Muhammad’s army.


5) If the Christians and Jews chose to live in peace under Islamic rule and paid the Jizza with willing submission, then they were spared.

That is what Muhammad commanded, and that is what Islam has practiced throughout its history.

 

[setst777]

Once again, Abrogation is one of the lengthiest, most complex, and most important topics in both the science of Qur’anic exegesis [tafsir] as well as that of Legal Theory [usul al-fiqh]. Imam Suyuti mentions that a countless number of scholars authored works solely on the topic of abrogation, and that many Imams said, “No one is allowed to give explanation [tafsir] of the Book of Allah until they understand abrogation.” Our Master Ali [may Allah ennoble his face] asked a judge if he knew which verses abrogated others, to which the judge replied that he did not. Imam Ali said, “You are ruined, and you have ruined others.” [Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an]

The theory of naskh [Abrogation] has been dealt with by many. The editorial remarks of Qatadah’s Kitab al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.10–8) for instance, listed over seventy names of those who have written solely on naskh (both classical and contemporary), while Abu ‘Ubayd’s alNasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.59–76) on the other hand, listed some thirty-nine names. Despite the numerous writings, or perhaps because of them, naskh remains a problematic theory, if not a difficult and divisive one (Mustafa Zaud, 1963: v.1, 4).


I know that 90% of the world's Muslims reject the Salafi/Wahhabist sect of Islam that you are describing in this thread.


You need to travel more


Missionaries and Christian organizations say the same thing about Christian persecution here in Mindanao as well.

Here's a video telling the story of a former Muslim who became a Christian pastor and was later killed.

Especially affected by persecution are the islands of Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi where Christian converts are vastly outnumbered by a majority population of Muslims. The main source of persecution in Mindanao is Islamic extremism, which especially targets Muslim background believers from the Islamic Sama and Tausug people groups. Those people are famous as “Sea Gypsies”, and they live mainly on Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi islands, though many have now migrated to the region’s main island,

Areas of the Philippine island of Mindanao are descending into the same sort of anti-Christian persecution witnessed in Iraq, an Italian missionary priest has reported.

Fr Sebastiano D’Ambra is the founder of the Silsilah movement which since 1984 has promoted interreligious dialogue along with members of the Muslim community.

“In some areas of Mindanao we are experiencing exactly the same thing as is happening in Iraq,” Fr D’Ambra said, speaking after anti-Christian attacks in southern Mindanao on Christmas Day.
Religious persecution – is Mindanao the new Iraq? | The Catholic Weekly

And check this one out.

View attachment 259186
Here is how a Christian persecution website reported the story.
View attachment 259185

Jihadists attack Christian majority city, Zamboanga, in Southern part of Philippine, rendering 60,000 Christians without home... This massive attack has left about 60,000 Christians to flee from their homes. They have been forced to live as refugees now.

What is more, international media has turned a blind eye to this incident. Thousands of Christians have been left stranded as a result of this attack. No one has even highlighted their plight.

Muslim rebels held thousands of residents of these areas captives, for a period of six days. The coastal villages in the south came under attack by these Islamic rebels.

As a result of these attacks, the Islamic extremists killed about 56 people while about 60,000 local Christians were forced to leave their homes.

The problem with the above article is that it isn't true. While the city this event took place in is a predominantly Christian city, it wasn't Christians who were displaced; although there were some. The six villages where the fighting took place were Muslim villages and while some Christians live in these villages, the population would be 5% or less. How do I know this? Because the people group I primarily work with live in the area affected by the siege mentioned in the article and I have been visiting those villages before and after this event took place. Based on my own observation, the number of Christians found in the refugee camps following the siege was around 5% with another 5% being animists, and the remaining being Muslim. I have provided a few of links from local sources related to this story that also show the truth.

5 years after Zamboanga siege, Muslim community picks up pieces

Zamboanga City standoff not a religious war

In Zamboanga City, the Department of Social Welfare and Development’s operations center reported that 62,329 persons are now staying in 20 evacuation centers in the city.

“A lot of people, about 90 percent Muslims, are suffering from this man-made calamity that Misuari is answerable for,” Hataman said. Hataman warned residents of Zamboanga City and Mindanao in general not to be misled by deceptive tactics aimed at driving deeper the wedge between Muslims and Christians. “We need to be informed properly and not to believe in deceptions,” he said.

When events like this happen in far flung parts of the world, it's easy for media outlets and organizations that report on Christian persecution to misrepresent the facts to further their agendas. Not all are guilty of intentionally publishing misleading information of course, but many are. Sometimes they rely on second hand information from sources they believe to be reliable and run with a story without doing any fact checking, in cases like that, they would not be at fault.

Christian persecution does occur in Mindanao, but reports about it are often exaggerated or events that are reported as persecution have nothing at all to do with Christians being killed for their faith.


This sentence in my earlier reply to you should have given you a hint that I have.

And this one to the OP earlier in the thread.

In all I have spent a considerable amount of time in five Muslim majority countries on three continents, and my missionary work here in Mindanao is exclusively carried out in Muslim majority communities.

Hi Joseph

setst777 said: ↑
So if one scholar says the topic of abrogation is contentious, he is right. But that does not mean abrogation is a mystery to the Islamic sources, or that it cannot be understood or identified. Most of the best Islamic scholars agree on most of verses that are abrogated.

setst said:
Your understanding is myth – not in accordance with the best Islamic scholarship and Sahih Hadith.

Joseph responds:
<<
Once again, Abrogation is one of the lengthiest, most complex, and most important topics in both the science of Qur’anic exegesis [tafsir] as well as that of Legal Theory [usul al-fiqh]. Imam Suyuti mentions that a countless number of scholars authored works solely on the topic of abrogation, and that many Imams said, “No one is allowed to give explanation [tafsir] of the Book of Allah until they understand abrogation.” Our Master Ali [may Allah ennoble his face] asked a judge if he knew which verses abrogated others, to which the judge replied that he did not. Imam Ali said, “You are ruined, and you have ruined others.” [Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an.

The theory of naskh [Abrogation] has been dealt with by many. The editorial remarks of Qatadah’s Kitab al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.10–8) for instance, listed over seventy names of those who have written solely on naskh (both classical and contemporary), while Abu ‘Ubayd’s alNasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.59–76) on the other hand, listed some thirty-nine names. Despite the numerous writings, or perhaps because of them, naskh remains a problematic theory, if not a difficult and divisive one (Mustafa Zaud, 1963: v.1, 4).
>>

Setst RE: Abrogation is a reality in the Qu'an. No amount of dodging will abrogate that.

You refused the most credible sources that I provided for you from Islam’s foremost scholars and Tafsir just so you could interpret abrogation the way that you feel qualified to do better than the scholars and Tafsir.

setst777 said: ↑
You don't know what roughly 90% of the world's Muslims believe or understand.

Your respond:
<<
I know that 90% of the world's Muslims reject the Salafi/Wahhabist sect of Islam that you are describing in this thread.
>>

Setst RE: You don’t even know that. The closest we can come to understanding what Muslims around the world actually think is by looking at the polls conducted on various topics. We see the many Muslims, in their own responses, indicate that their view Sharia, terrorism, apostacy, blasphemy, etc are not unpopular and are far more than 90%.

A grass-roots revival is occurring in Islam to re-establish Sharia and the fundamentals of the Islamic faith.

"The Islamic revival of the late 20th century brought along calls by Islamist movements for full implementation of sharia, including hudud corporal punishments, such as stoning, which in some cases resulted in traditionalist legal reform."
Application of Islamic law by country - Wikipedia - 2nd paragraph.

For an number of reasons, the grassroots effort for revival in Islam - especially as regards Sharia - is still ongoing, even though liberal Muslims may detest it.

Islamic revival - Wikipedia

setst777 said: ↑
the article goes on to say that Christians in those countries are persecuted, and family members may even kill their own if they become Christian. This is in contrast to how you explain that Muslims you met as friendly:

Joseph responds:
<<
Missionaries and Christian organizations say the same thing about Christian persecution here in Mindanao as well.
>>

Setst RE: Oh really?

JosephZ said: ↑
For the past 7+ years I've been serving as a missionary in Muslim communities primarily in Mindanao (Although this has extended into Malaysia and Indonesia from time to time) and living in a majority Muslim village in Davao City.

In all I have spent a considerable amount of time in five Muslim majority countries on three continents, and my missionary work here in Mindanao is exclusively carried out in Muslim majority communities.

Setst RE:
The Muslim majority nations in Asia, especially Malasia, are generally far more lenient and have laws to protect minorities. However, these are government laws rather than Sharia.

Reliance of the Traveler
Things That Are Not Inconsistent With The Acceptance Of Fate
w59.2 “And this clarifies the Koranic verses and hadiths about hatred for the sake of Allah and love for the sake of Allah, being unyielding towards the unbelievers, hard against them, and detesting them, while accepting the destiny of Allah Most High insofar as it is the decree of Allah Mighty and Majestic”.

And then you have the Sharia Law details regarding unbelievers, and also Christians and Jews.

 

[ruthiesea]

Here’s a thought, don’t judge people based on their ethnicity, religion, or area of origin. Instead judge people as individuals based on their behavior.
"If a person wishes to become a priest or a Levite, he cannot; but even a Gentile can be righteous." ~ Midrash Tehillim

 

[JosephZ]

Try reading the following Islamic source to gain a better understanding...
Section 1: Immunity Declared

That is a very good explanation of those verses found in Chapter 9. Maybe you should read it again.

Can you imagine over 270 million people slaughtered by Islam in its 1400 years of conquest (which includes all those Africans who died on Muslim slave ships).

Source for 270 million slaughtered by Islam?

So if one scholar says the topic of abrogation is contentious, he is right. But that does not mean abrogation is a mystery to the Islamic sources, or that it cannot be understood or identified. Most of the best Islamic scholars agree on most of verses that are abrogated.

Can you provide a list of the verses that theses best Islamic scholars agree on with sources?

Your understanding is myth – not in accordance with the best Islamic scholarship and Sahih Hadith.

My understanding comes from taking several courses in Islamic Studies from various schools of thought spread out over a period of more than three decades, reading the exact same Islamic texts as you have presented here, living and working among Muslims in different parts of the world for nearly a decade of my life in total, and being a missionary to Muslims for the past 7+ years. And yours?

Abrogation is a reality in the Qu'an. No amount of dodging will abrogate that.

If I didn't believe that abrogation existed, I wouldn't have included this in my previous post: Abrogation is one of the lengthiest, most complex, and most important topics in both the science of Qur’anic exegesis [tafsir] as well as that of Legal Theory [usul al-fiqh]. Imam Suyuti mentions that a countless number of scholars authored works solely on the topic of abrogation, and that many Imams said, “No one is allowed to give explanation [tafsir] of the Book of Allah until they understand abrogation.” Our Master Ali [may Allah ennoble his face] asked a judge if he knew which verses abrogated others, to which the judge replied that he did not. Imam Ali said, “You are ruined, and you have ruined others.” [Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an]

The theory of naskh [Abrogation] has been dealt with by many. The editorial remarks of Qatadah’s Kitab al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.10–8) for instance, listed over seventy names of those who have written solely on naskh (both classical and contemporary), while Abu ‘Ubayd’s alNasikh wa al-Mansukh (p.59–76) on the other hand, listed some thirty-nine names. Despite the numerous writings, or perhaps because of them, naskh remains a problematic theory, if not a difficult and divisive one (Mustafa Zaud, 1963: v.1, 4).

You don’t even know that. The closest we can come to understanding what Muslims around the world actually think is by looking at the polls conducted on various topics. We see the many Muslims, in their own responses, indicate that their view Sharia, terrorism, apostacy, blasphemy, etc are not unpopular and are far more than 90%.

The sect of Islam you are describing here is only found in the two branches of Islam highlighted below.

The world’s 1.6 Billion Muslim population can be approximately divided into the following main sects:
1) Hanafi Sunni Muslims : 35%
2) Shafei Sunni Muslim : 25%
3) Shia Muslims : 20%
4) Maliki Sunni Muslims : 15%
5) Hambali Sunni Muslims: 4%
6) Salafi Muslims : 1%

The Hanbali school was founded by Ahmad ibn Hanbal in the 9th century. It is primarily found in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and has some presence in the countries surrounding the KSA, such as Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Yemen, and Oman. It is the smallest Sunni school by far, estimated to contain fewer than 5% of the world’s Muslims as adherents, but as they are concentrated in areas of great wealth and power it has a stronger influence on global Islamic thought than might be expected.

Outside of the Arabian Peninsula followers of this sect are primarily found within the ranks of Islamic extremist groups and among some of their sympathizers. I'm probably being way to generous with my 10%.

 

[setst777]

That is a very good explanation of those verses found in Chapter 9. Maybe you should read it again.
I'm probably being way to generous with my 10%. You will not find a source anywhere that put's the number higher than that.

Hi Joseph,

You write:
<<
That is a very good explanation of those verses found in Chapter 9. Maybe you should read it again.
I'm probably being way to generous with my 10%. You will not find a source anywhere that put's the number higher than that.
>>

setst RE: I read it, but you obviously did not. The teaching agrees with the Hadith and Tafsir I have studied and of which I quoted to you. Try reading it again and understand what it is saying. If you still can't understand, that is your fault, because it is crystal clear and easy to understand.

You write:
<<
Source for 270 million slaughtered by Islam?
>>

setst RE: Muslims will disagree and attempt to re-write history, just as they do regarding Israel, the Holocaust, their own history about the 'Golden Age,' and the like. However, history has recorded the truth if one desires to understand it.

As well, even some Christians will try to re-write history to defend the Muslims who slaughtered and enslaved their ancestors and who seek their destruction. Islamic nations in the Middle East have nearly wiped out all Christians and Jews, and those who remain there are persecuted.

Some Christians love supporting Islam anyway because they have naively bought into the lie that Islam is Peace and wouldn't harm anyone.

The Greatest Murder Machine in History

Islamic conquest 270 million - Video Search Results

Joseph wrote:
<<
Can you provide a list of the verses that theses best Islamic scholars agree on with sources?
>>

setst RE: I gave you those sources but you refused to study them. That is to your shame.

Joseph writes:
<<
My understanding comes from taking several courses in Islamic Studies from various schools of thought over a period of more than three decades, reading the exact same Islamic texts as you have presented here, living and working among Muslims in different parts of the world for nearly a decade of my life in total, and being a missionary to Muslims for the past 7+ years. And yours?
>>

setst RE: Yes, so you said, including your schooling by a Muslim terrorist supporter. Great education.

During the Obama Administration, President Obama clearly ordered the following:

"Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed on Wednesday that the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive."
Obama administration pulls references to Islam from terror training materials, official says

This is why you likely never receive proper instruction regarding Islam.

Joseph writes:
<<
If I didn't believe that abrogation existed, I wouldn't have included this in my previous post:
>>

setst RE: Abrogation exists and we can understand and identify it if we view the Hadith, and the Tafsir. I gave you the best sources. Yet you refuse to see, and instead want to argue that we can never really know which, if any, verses are abrogated. Somehow it is all a mystery to you that you think no one can ever understand. I clearly understand verses that are abrogated simply by viewing the Hadith and the Tafsir explanations.

Joseph writes:
<<
The sect of Islam you are describing here is only found in the two branches of Islam highlighted below.
>>

setst RE: I didn't describe any particular sect, although the majority of my quotes were from Sunni scholars. And the Muslim Polls I referenced are from Muslims in general, not any particular sect.

Joseph writes:
<<
I'm probably being way to generous with my 10%. You will not find a source anywhere that put's the number higher than that.
>>

setst RE: YOUR 10%??? You give yourself undue credit for thinking you are able to figure out what the Muslims think because some friendly Muslims gave you the time of day and talked with you. Look at the polls to get an idea what they are really thinking.

 

[Joyousperson]

The violent verses found in the Qur'an and those that are talking about not befriending certain non-Muslims don't abrogate the verses of peace because of the context they were written in. There are certain situations where the verses of peace apply, and others where the verses of violence apply, therefore, each verse has a specific context and application. In other words, each verse in the Qur'an is to be applied to its appropriate situation.

For example when Qur'an 9 says "When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them," or "Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief" it is dealing with specific events at a point in history when Meccan pagans were breaking their peace treaties and declaring war on the Muslims and when certain Muslims were standing in the way of other Muslims or refusing themselves to migrate to Medina. Those verses would not negate the peaceful verses in the Qur'an since they are very specific to their intent and the point in history they were to be applied.

The following was revealed regarding those who refrained from emigrating because of their families and trade: O you who believe, do not take your fathers and brothers for your friends, if they prefer, if they have chosen, disbelief over belief; whoever of you takes them for friends, such are the evildoers. -- Jalal - Al-Jalalayn

(O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren) who are in Mecca from among the disbelievers (for friends) in religion (if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith) if they choose disbelief instead of faith. (Whoso of you taketh them for friends) in religion, (such are wrong-doers) disbelievers like them; it is also said that this means: O ye who believe! take not your believing fathers and brothers who are in Mecca, who had prevented you from migrating to Medina, for allies, seeking their help and assistance, if they choose to remain in the abode of disbelief, i.e. Mecca, rather than migrate to the abode of Islam, i.e. Medina. Whosoever takes them for allies harms only himself. -- Abbas - Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs

(O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith) [9:23-24]. Said al-Kalbi: “When the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, was commanded to migrate to Medina, some men went to their fathers, brothers or wives and said: 'We have been commanded to migrate to Medina'. Thus, some people liked the command and hastened to execute it, while the wives, dependents and children of others hung on to some others, saying: 'We beseech you by Allah not to leave us to no one, causing our waste and peril'. The hearts of these softened for them and, as a result, they refrained from migrating. These words of Allah, exalted is He, were then revealed to rebuke them (O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith…)”. As for those who stayed back in Mecca and did not migrate, Allah, exalted is He, revealed (then wait till Allah bringeth His command to pass…) [9:24], meaning fighting and the conquest of Mecca. -- Wahidi - Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi

This really all comes down to using common sense.

You have not taken the alternative views from other more famous Islamic scholars.

First of all you must note the reality of the Chronological order of the Quran.
Where did Allah state the chapters of Quran should be presented in the order like it is in all Qurans today?

The fact that the chapters of the Quran are arranged mainly from larger chapter to smaller ones is a clue there is something fishy [not credible] with the ideology of Islam.​

While we may not be able to determine 100% the precise chronological order, we can establish a reasonable 90% accuracy of the Chronological order of the Chapters of the Quran were revealed to Muhammad or rather invented by Muhammad or a group of people.

Chapter 9 as commonly accepted is the final chapter revealed to Muhammad.
The funny point is the events in Chapter 9 were happening during Muhammad's time with him participating in it. If it is to be historical why is there is need for Allah to narrate it. Muhammad and followers could narrate the historical events since they were directly in it.

Thus the purpose was Allah used the events in Chapter 9 as it happened to Muhammad and his followers as a basis to embed the divine principles for Muslims to adhere to in similar circumstances in the future, i.e. when Islam is threatened.

Note the Story of Noah in the Quran. That happened thousands of historical years before Muhammad and our present time. If such stories just as the events of chapter 9 were to be stories only as you claimed them to be, then, the principles of the sin of homosexuality in the Story of Noah should be applicable to the time [>3000 years ago] of Noah only, thus not to the present time!

But the point is Allah has used the many [unabrogated] Biblical stories of thousands of years ago to carry the divine principles within the Quran to be applied to Muslims eternally.
Thus the divine principles re killing of non-Muslims under certain conditions of threat in Chapter 9 [abrogating earlier messages] should be applied eternally.

In the context of the whole of the Quran's 6236 verses, the non-Muslims are an eternal threat to Islam, thus at war [Darul-al-harb] all the time, e.g. the following verse within the 3400++ verses that are antagonistic and contemptuous to non-Muslims.

60:4. There is a goodly pattern [examplar] for you - Abraham and those [Muslims] with him, when they told their folk [infidels]; Lo! we [Muslims] are guiltless of you [infidels] and all that [partners, sons, gods] ye [infidels] worship beside Allah.
We [Muslims] have done with you [infidels]. And there hath arisen between us [Muslims] and you [infidels] hostility and hate forever until ye [infidels] believe in Allah only
save [except] that which Abraham promised his father (when he said): I [Abraham] will ask forgiveness for thee [Abraham's father], though I own nothing for thee [as an infidel] from Allah Our Lord! In Thee [Allah] we [Muslims] put our trust, and unto Thee we turn repentant, and unto Thee is the journeying.
​

Since Allah stated the non-Muslim are a threat and at war with Muslims eternally, Muslims can at anytime apply the principles in chapter 9 whenever and wherever they so wish, which permission from Allah.

Prove to me how those Muslims who want to kill non-Muslims in accordance with the divine commands in Chapter 9 and other chapters are wrong.
Btw, WHO ARE YOU, me and others to judge they are wrong, when as per Quran, only Allah can judge.

The point that the majority of Muslims [80%] do not comply with the divine principles of antagonism and war against non-Muslims in Chapter 9 and other chapters is because they are either ignorant of the real principles in the Quran or they have exercise their more compassion state as more of a human being than being Muslim.

And the reality is there is a % [20% conservatively] who are evil prone and are thus influenced and inspired by the warring elements in the Quran to attack and kill non-Muslims upon the slightest inkling of threat to Islam.
This is so glaringly evident where non-Muslims are being killed for silly things like drawing cartoons of Prophet Muhammad which is deemed a threat to Islam.

You agreed that Islam was founded by a false prophet, who based on historical evidence was a warlord and followed by the imperialism, evil and violence throughout is 1400 years history till the present. Thus is more likely the earlier non-aggressive verses were more likely to please the pagans, Jews and Christian as a pretense to convert them. But the true nature of evil and violence of Islam reared its ugly head when all of them rejected Muhammad's preaching.

 

[JosephZ]

I read it, but you obviously did not. The teaching agrees with the Hadith and Tafsir I have studied and of which I quoted to you. Try reading it again and understand what it is saying. If you still can't understand, that is your fault, because it is crystal clear and easy to understand.

Read what I wrote again about Chapter 9.

Qur'an 9 starts by saying "A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty."

Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

The verse in Chapter 9 where it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them" is referring to a very specific group of non-Muslims (Those which Muhammad had made a treaty with) at a specific point in history. It was not talking about all non-Muslims and those commands were not addressed to Muslims living in 2019. This really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.

Now let's start at the beginning of Chapter 9 so we can see which polytheists are being talked about.

1. A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty.

4. Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill the treaty with them to the end of its term. God loves the righteous.

As seen in these two verses, it's not talking about all polytheists. Since verse 4 says "Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you," then this automatically tells us that some of the polytheists have broken their treaties.

7. How can there be a treaty with the polytheists on the part of God and His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque? As long as they are upright with you, be upright with them. God loves the pious.

8. How? Whenever they overcome you, they respect neither kinship nor treaty with you. They satisfy you with lip service, but their hearts refuse, and most of them are immoral.

10. Towards a believer they respect neither kinship nor treaty. These are the transgressors.

In the above verses we again see a distinction between polytheists, Those who upheld their treaties (Verse 7) and those who didn't respect their treaties (Verses 8 & 9). Those who didn't keep their treaties are the transgressors.

13. Will you not fight a people who violated their oaths, and planned to exile the Messenger, and initiated hostilities against you? Do you fear them? It is God you should fear, if you are believers.

The above question wouldn't have been asked had there not been polytheists who had already broken their treaty. So when you read verse 5:

When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way. God is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.

When it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them," it's obvious that it's only talking about those who have already broken their treaties, and not all polytheists.

The link you provided confirms what I said in my reply to you. I will just pick some of the more relevant portions of the article to show this.

The declaration of Barā’at (immunity) was for the infidels’ perjury which has been referred to in verses 7 and 8 of the current Surah. In Islam, the general law is that promises should be fulfilled, and as long as the opposite party is faithful to the treaty, it should be kept, too.

The addressee ‘you’ in the sentence: “towards those of the polytheists with whom you made covenant ” is both the Messenger of Allah (S) and the Muslims. Thus, it means that they should declare immunity unto the polytheists between whom and them there was an agreement, because Allah (s.w.t.) and His Messenger (S) are quit of them.

The objective meaning here is that Allah (s.w.t.) and His Messenger (S) are quit of giving a promise to them and, after that, fulfilling it, because the polytheists who made covenants with them broke their promises.

That covenant was not a permanent (and an absolute) treaty, but it was bound over a definite point of time and for a certain length of time, so that when its term was ended that covenant would be broken, either.

It has also been pointed out in some traditions that the Messenger of Allah (S) had conditioned the above mentioned matters with them in the treaty. It has also been narrated that the idolaters broke their promise or decided to break it.

Then, Allah, the Glorified, commanded His Prophet to break their covenant, too Next to that, through the following verse, Allah, the Glorified, addressing the idolaters, says:

The Qur’ānic phrase: “So go about in the earth freely…” addresses the pagans of Mecca meaning that they could go about freely, and with peace of mind, in the land of Mecca and, being in easy circumstances.

“…for four months…” which means when this time was ended and the pagans did not embrace Islam, the string of their covenant would be broken and the security of life and wealth would be removed from them.

“Except those of the polytheists with whom you made covenant, and who have not failed you in anything nor have supported anyone against you. Then fulfil their treaty with them until (the end of) their term; surely Allah loves the pious ones.”

This unilateral cancellation of pagans’ covenants related only to those pagans from whom some signs of perjury, or preparation of perjury, had been appeared. This harshness of action is for the sake that Islam’s plan is to root out idolatry from the whole points of the earth, since idolatry is not a creed or religion which could be respected.
Section 1: Immunity Declared

Once again, Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

Chapter 9 is addressed to a very specific audience at a very specific point of time in history. If you ever take the time to take some courses in Islamic Studies, you will be taught about the historical and textual context that these verses and others found in the Qur'an were written. You will not learn this by visiting anti-Islamic propaganda sites and listening to people like David Wood.

I'm actually glad you provided this source as it gives me another tool to better explain Chapter 9 in the future.

Joseph wrote:
<<
Can you provide a list of the verses that theses best Islamic scholars agree on with sources?
>>
setst RE: I gave you those sources but you refused to study them. That is to your shame.

I was looking for sources showing where some of the best Islamic scholars have said that Verse 9:5 for example supersedes one or more of the peaceful verses. Abrogation requires that a later verse override an earlier one (Verse for a Verse), therefore, you have to have a cross reference to the particular verse that is being replaced. For example, what I'm looking for is so and so says that Qur'an 9:5 supersedes Qur'an 2:256 or something along those lines.

Yes, so you said, including your schooling by a Muslim terrorist supporter. Great education.

Since countering violent extremism is incorporated into our ministry here and this cleric was arrested in Davao City, that was the reason why I decided to enroll in some of his his courses so that I could have a better understanding of what he teaches since he is popular among many of the Muslims in the communities we work in. Actually they were very outspoken following his arrest and deportation.

Enrolling in his classes to get a better understanding of what he is teaching to the people we work among here would be a wise thing to do don't you think?

setst RE: YOUR 10%??? You give yourself undue credit for thinking you are able to figure out what the Muslims think because some friendly Muslims gave you the time of day and talked with you. Look at the polls to get an idea what they are really thinking.

Most of the polls in that link you provided can't be sourced. I mentioned this to you in an earlier reply. The ones I could find the stats were very selective and left out a lot of information. I also provided polls that showed where Christians poll at nearly the same numbers when similar questions are asked, even when it comes to using terrorism against innocent civilians.

 

[setst777]

Read what I wrote again about Chapter 9.

Qur'an 9 starts by saying "A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty."

Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

The verse in Chapter 9 where it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them" is referring to a very specific group of non-Muslims (Those which Muhammad had made a treaty with) at a specific point in history. It was not talking about all non-Muslims and those commands were not addressed to Muslims living in 2019. This really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.

Now let's start at the beginning of Chapter 9 so we can see which polytheists are being talked about.

1. A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty.

4. Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill the treaty with them to the end of its term. God loves the righteous.

As seen in these two verses, it's not talking about all polytheists. Since verse 4 says "Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you," then this automatically tells us that some of the polytheists have broken their treaties.

7. How can there be a treaty with the polytheists on the part of God and His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque? As long as they are upright with you, be upright with them. God loves the pious.

8. How? Whenever they overcome you, they respect neither kinship nor treaty with you. They satisfy you with lip service, but their hearts refuse, and most of them are immoral.

10. Towards a believer they respect neither kinship nor treaty. These are the transgressors.

In the above verses we again see a distinction between polytheists, Those who upheld their treaties (Verse 7) and those who didn't respect their treaties (Verses 8 & 9). Those who didn't keep their treaties are the transgressors.

13. Will you not fight a people who violated their oaths, and planned to exile the Messenger, and initiated hostilities against you? Do you fear them? It is God you should fear, if you are believers.

The above question wouldn't have been asked had there not been polytheists who had already broken their treaty. So when you read verse 5:

When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way. God is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.

When it says "Once the sacred months have passed kill the polytheists wherever you find them," it's obvious that it's only talking about those who have already broken their treaties, and not all polytheists.

The link you provided confirms what I said in my reply to you. I will just pick some of the more relevant portions of the article to show this.

The declaration of Barā’at (immunity) was for the infidels’ perjury which has been referred to in verses 7 and 8 of the current Surah. In Islam, the general law is that promises should be fulfilled, and as long as the opposite party is faithful to the treaty, it should be kept, too.

The addressee ‘you’ in the sentence: “towards those of the polytheists with whom you made covenant ” is both the Messenger of Allah (S) and the Muslims. Thus, it means that they should declare immunity unto the polytheists between whom and them there was an agreement, because Allah (s.w.t.) and His Messenger (S) are quit of them.

The objective meaning here is that Allah (s.w.t.) and His Messenger (S) are quit of giving a promise to them and, after that, fulfilling it, because the polytheists who made covenants with them broke their promises.

That covenant was not a permanent (and an absolute) treaty, but it was bound over a definite point of time and for a certain length of time, so that when its term was ended that covenant would be broken, either.

It has also been pointed out in some traditions that the Messenger of Allah (S) had conditioned the above mentioned matters with them in the treaty. It has also been narrated that the idolaters broke their promise or decided to break it.

Then, Allah, the Glorified, commanded His Prophet to break their covenant, too Next to that, through the following verse, Allah, the Glorified, addressing the idolaters, says:

The Qur’ānic phrase: “So go about in the earth freely…” addresses the pagans of Mecca meaning that they could go about freely, and with peace of mind, in the land of Mecca and, being in easy circumstances.

“…for four months…” which means when this time was ended and the pagans did not embrace Islam, the string of their covenant would be broken and the security of life and wealth would be removed from them.

“Except those of the polytheists with whom you made covenant, and who have not failed you in anything nor have supported anyone against you. Then fulfil their treaty with them until (the end of) their term; surely Allah loves the pious ones.”

This unilateral cancellation of pagans’ covenants related only to those pagans from whom some signs of perjury, or preparation of perjury, had been appeared. This harshness of action is for the sake that Islam’s plan is to root out idolatry from the whole points of the earth, since idolatry is not a creed or religion which could be respected.
Section 1: Immunity Declared

Once again, Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

Chapter 9 is addressed to a very specific audience at a very specific point of time in history. If you ever take the time to take some courses in Islamic Studies, you will be taught about the historical and textual context that these verses and others found in the Qur'an were written. You will not learn this by visiting anti-Islamic propaganda sites and listening to people like David Wood.

I'm actually glad you provided this source as it gives me another tool to better explain Chapter 9 in the future.


I was looking for sources showing where some of the best Islamic scholars have said that Verse 9:5 for example supersedes one or more of the peaceful verses. Abrogation requires that a later verse override an earlier one (Verse for a Verse), therefore, you have to have a cross reference to the particular verse that is being replaced. For example, what I'm looking for is so and so says that Qur'an 9:5 supersedes Qur'an 2:256 or something along those lines.

Since countering violent extremism is incorporated into our ministry here and this cleric was arrested in Davao City, that was the reason why I decided to enroll in some of his his courses so that I could have a better understanding of what he teaches since he is popular among many of the Muslims in the communities we work in. Actually they were very outspoken following his arrest and deportation.

Enrolling in his classes to get a better understanding of what he is teaching to the people we work among here would be a wise thing to do don't you think?


Most of the polls in that link you provided can't be sourced. I mentioned this to you in an earlier reply. The ones I could find the stats were very selective and left out a lot of information. I also provided polls that showed where Christians poll at nearly the same numbers when similar questions are asked, even when it comes to using terrorism against innocent civilians.

Hi Joseph,

You write:
<<
Read what I wrote again about Chapter 9.
>>

setst RE: I already read it once already. You give yourself too much credit to think you can interpret the Qur'an better than the Tafsir, or that you know what all the Muslims are thinking. I mean no disrespect, but that sounds unusual and prideful to me.

You write:
<<
I was looking for sources showing where some of the best Islamic scholars have said that Verse 9:5 for example supersedes one or more of the peaceful verses. Abrogation requires that a later verse override an earlier one (Verse for a Verse), therefore, you have to have a cross reference to the particular verse that is being replaced. For example, what I'm looking for is so and so says that Qur'an 9:5 supersedes Qur'an 2:256 or something along those lines.
>>

setst RE: I gave you the sources that do just that. I tell you what, I am already familiar with the sources. But, since you don't read the sources I give you, why don't you do your own honest research. It's all online for anyone to retrieve.

You write:
<<
Since countering violent extremism is incorporated into our ministry here and this cleric was arrested in Davao City, that was the reason why I decided to enroll in some of his his courses so that I could have a better understanding of what he teaches since he is popular among many of the Muslims in the communities we work in. Actually they were very outspoken following his arrest and deportation.
>>

setst RE: Oh, now you say that. Too convenient an excuse. You enrolled in his course and got a certificate from him. You seemed really proud of that achievement and learned that Muslims are really peaceful and Islam is peace. Right! Now that you realize you have been had by a Muslim using Takyah on you who really supports terrorism while deceiving you, the story seems to change.

Joseph writes:
<<
Most of the polls in that link you provided can't be sourced. I mentioned this to you in an earlier reply. The ones I could find the stats were very selective and left out a lot of information. I also provided polls that showed where Christians poll at nearly the same numbers when similar questions are asked, even when it comes to using terrorism against innocent civilians.
>>

setst RE: If sources listed cannot be accessed, or are no longer available, then use your browser to search for the document being referenced. For instance, I was denied access to a link to the first poll result so I used my browser to access that document. Here was my result....

Sixty Percent of US Muslims Reject Freedom of Expression

Pay careful attention to all the links provided in the above document.

Our discussion is regarding Muslims, Sharia and Islamic terrorism mainly. I don't see how quoting a Christian poll is addressing these issues.

For instance,

• Does the Law of Christ teach us to terrorize others?
• Does the Law of Christ teach us to hate unbelievers and kill them if they don't repent?
• Does the Law of Christ teach us to make Muslims pay the Jizya with willing submission or be killed?
• Do Christians censor and threaten Muslims for talking bad about our Scriptures and our faith like they do to Christians?
• Do Christians try to introduce into the legal code blasphemy laws against Muslims to have their websites, social media accounts, and youtube videos censored and removed for telling the truth about us, like they do to us when we try to tell the truth about them?
• Do Christians go around making death threats to, and killing, Muslims for dishonoring Jesus or burning our Scriptures, or making fun of Christians, like they do to us?
• Do Christians put on suicide vests to blow up Muslim public areas and Mosques, like they do to our public areas?

 

[Joyousperson]

Read what I wrote again about Chapter 9.

Qur'an 9 starts by saying "A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty."

Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

Once again, Do you believe that Muhammad had made treaties with all the non-Muslim tribes in the world? What about the ones found outside the Arabian Peninsula, those in North and South America?

Chapter 9 is addressed to a very specific audience at a very specific point of time in history. If you ever take the time to take some courses in Islamic Studies, you will be taught about the historical and textual context that these verses and others found in the Qur'an were written. You will not learn this by visiting anti-Islamic propaganda sites and listening to people like David Wood.

Note in 9:1 and throughout, Allah mentioned the 'polytheists' and not the Qureshi or Meccans.
As such it implies the principle is applicable to all polytheists and non-Muslims [where indicated] around the world as and when they encounter similar situations with non-Muslims.

This principle of warring and killing non-Muslims is not only in Chapter 9 but all over the Medinian chapters.

Note, the non-Muslims [of all kinds] is the eternal enemies of Islam is expressed within the context of the 6236 verses of the Quran.

Btw, I asked you, by your same logic,
will you insist the Story of Lot in the Quran referred to only homosexuals and their abominable acts during Noah' time and not to homosexuals at present?
Also what about the Story of Salih, Shuib, Hud and the likes?

Note the supposedly Story re Aishah's adultery, i.e.

24:19. Lo! those [sinners] who love [HBB: hibb] [tashīʿa: spread] that slander [FHSh: l-fāḥishatu -immorality of 'Ayesha'] should be spread concerning those [Muslims] who believe, theirs [sinners] will be a painful punishment in the world and the Hereafter. Allah knoweth. Ye [Muslim -sinners] know not.
​

Since the above is historical as claimed, then those who slander at other times will not be punished?

If you insist on the 'historical' perspective then the whole Quran should be historical and relevant only the period 610-632 CE and not to the present, but that is not the case. Therefore you are wrong.

 

[setst777]

Note in 9:1 and throughout, Allah mentioned the 'polytheists' and not the Qureshi or Meccans.
As such it implies the principle is applicable to all polytheists and non-Muslims [where indicated] around the world as an when they encounter similar situations with non-Muslims.

This principle of warring and killing non-Muslims is not only in Chapter 9 but all over the Medinian chapters.

Note, the non-Muslims [of all kinds] is the eternal enemies of Islam is expressed within the context of the 6236 verses of the Quran.

Btw, I asked you, by your same logic,
will you insist the Story of Noah in the Quran referred to only homosexuals and their abominable acts during Noah' time and not to homosexuals at present?

Note the supposedly Story re Aishah's adultery, i.e.

24:19. Lo! those [sinners] who love [HBB: hibb] [tashīʿa: spread] that slander [FHSh: l-fāḥishatu -immorality of 'Ayesha'] should be spread concerning those [Muslims] who believe, theirs [sinners] will be a painful punishment in the world and the Hereafter. Allah knoweth. Ye [Muslim -sinners] know not.
​

Since the above is historical as claimed, then those who slander at other times will not be punished?

If you insist on the 'historical' perspective then the whole Quran should be historical and relevant only the period 610-632 CE and not to the present, but that is not the case. Therefore you are wrong.

setst RE: Exactly! I mean, if the New Testament was formed at least 600 years before Muhammad ever existed, then that would stand to reason - using Joseph's logic - that the Christian Scripture do not apply to our day and time. Funny, when the situation is turned around like this, then comes the defense of the Christian Scriptures.

Well, I firmly believe in the Christian Scriptures, and that they are for us today, just as I believe the Qur'an, although formed earlier, address the faith of Muslims to this day. And what I am saying is absolutely accurate.

Muslims go even farther in making the Qur'an relevant for them... Muslims have a whole religion based on following the commands and examples of Muhammad, even dressing like him. Nothing has changed for them - they are still living in the 7th century.

 

[Joyousperson]

JosephZ,

Here is where your insistence of the "historical events" are to be confined to the historical past fall flat.

Here are a listing of verses that explain why the historical stories from the Bible [and elsewhere] are critical and to be effective eternally.
These points are also applicable to the stories related to Chapter 9 and other chapters connected with events that happened during Muhammad's time. The principles embedded in these chapters are divine principles for Muslims to adhere to when in similar circumstances in the future.

Here is Allah's intention re the Biblical stories of old which should same for the stories that happened during Muhammad's time, e.g. in Chapter 9, Chapter 5 and others;

2:252. These [stories of old] are the portents of Allah which We recite unto thee (Muhammad) with truth, and Lo! thou art [one] of the number of (Our) messengers;

20:99. Thus relate Who unto thee (Muhammad) some tidings [Biblical stories] of that which happened of old, and We have given thee from Our presence a Reminder.

64:5. Hath not the story reached you of those [infidels of old] who disbelieved of old and so did taste the ill effects of their [infidels'] conduct, and theirs will be a painful doom.

11:120. And all that We relate unto thee of the Story of the [past] Messengers is in order that thereby We may make firm thy heart. And herein hath come unto thee the Truth and an exhortation and a reminder for believers. [Reinforce in believers Muhammad's position]

69:12. That We might make it [stories re prophets of old] a memorial for you, and that remembering ears (that heard the story) might remember.

9:70. Hath not the fame of those [infidels of old] before them reached them [present infidels] the folk of Noah, Aad, Thamud, the folk of Abraham, the dwellers of Midian and the disasters (which befell them)? Their [the infidels of old] messengers (from Allah) came unto them with proofs (of Allah's sovereignty). So Allah surely wronged them not, but they [infidels] did wrong themselves.

26:69. Recite unto them the Story of Abraham: [v 69-104]

41:13. But if they [infidels] turn away, then say [O Muhammad]: I warn you of a thunderbolt like the thunderbolt (which fell of old upon the tribes) of Aad and Thamud;

46:21. And make mention (O Muhammad) of the brother of Aad when he warned his folk [infidels] among the wind curved sand hills and verily warners came and went before and after him saying: Serve none but Allah. Lo! I fear for you [infidels] the doom of a tremendous Day.

7:101. Such were the townships. We relate some tidings of them unto thee (Muhammad). Their messengers verily came unto them [infidels] with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), but they [infidels] could not believe because they [infidels] had before denied. Thus doth Allah print upon the hearts of disbelievers [infidels] (that they hear not).

11:100. That is (something) of the tidings of the townships' (which were destroyed of old). We relate it unto thee (Muhammad). Some of them are standing and some (already) reaped.

11:103. Lo! herein verily [tidings of the townships' ] there is a portent for those who fear the doom of the Hereafter. That is a Day unto which mankind will be gathered, and that is a day that will be witnessed.

26:103. Lo! Herein [Story of Abraham] is indeed a portent, yet most of them [infidels] are not believers!

7:176. … Narrate [QSS: qasas] unto them [Children of Adam] the history (of the men of old), that haply they may take thought.

11:100. That is (something) of the tidings of the townships' (which were destroyed of old). We relate it unto thee (Muhammad). Some of them are standing and some (already) reaped.

12:111. In their [messengers'] history verily there is a lesson for men of understanding. … …

14:9. Hath not the history of those before you reached you [Muhammad]: the folk of Noah. and (the tribes of) Aad and Thamud, and those after them? None save Allah knoweth them. Their messengers came unto them with clear proofs, but they thrust their hands into their mouths, and said: Lo! we disbelieve in that wherewith ye have been sent, and lo! we are in grave doubt concerning that to which ye call us.

19:41. And make mention (O Muhammad) in the Scripture of Abraham. Lo! He [Abraham] was a saint [SDQ; ṣiddīqan], a Prophet.

50:37. Lo! therein verily is a reminder for him [Muslims] who hath a heart, or giveth ear [l-samʿa] with full intelligence.. [shahīdun; witness]
​

Note Allah in the above verses stressed the importance of the history of the messengers of old.
So it is similar when Allah telling the stories of Muhammad and his warring with and killing of the Qureshi to present the principles that all Muslims must comply with under similar circumstances.

Therefore the verses in Chapter 9 and others similar verses CANNOT be merely confined to the historical period involved, but these are verses representing the eternal principles that all Muslims must adopt against non-Muslims under similar conditions.

That the majority of Muslims do not comply with the warring and killing of non-Muslims is not because they are good Muslims, but rather they are good compassionate human beings or are ignorant of what they need to comply.
In this case these majority of Muslims who are good human beings are actually not-so-good Muslims who will likely face Allah's wrath on Judgment Day for not complying with Allah's command fully.

 

[setst777]

JosephZ,

Here is where your insistence of the "historical events" are to be confined to the historical past fall flat.

Here are a listing of verses that explain why the historical stories from the Bible [and elsewhere] are critical and to be effective eternally.
These points are also applicable to the stories related to Chapter 9 and other chapters connected with events that happened during Muhammad's time. The principles embedded in these chapters are divine principles for Muslims to adhere to when in similar circumstances in the future.

Here is Allah's intention re the Biblical stories of old which should same for the stories that happened during Muhammad's time, e.g. in Chapter 9, Chapter 5 and others;

2:252. These [stories of old] are the portents of Allah which We recite unto thee (Muhammad) with truth, and Lo! thou art [one] of the number of (Our) messengers;

20:99. Thus relate Who unto thee (Muhammad) some tidings [Biblical stories] of that which happened of old, and We have given thee from Our presence a Reminder.

64:5. Hath not the story reached you of those [infidels of old] who disbelieved of old and so did taste the ill effects of their [infidels'] conduct, and theirs will be a painful doom.

11:120. And all that We relate unto thee of the Story of the [past] Messengers is in order that thereby We may make firm thy heart. And herein hath come unto thee the Truth and an exhortation and a reminder for believers. [Reinforce in believers Muhammad's position]

69:12. That We might make it [stories re prophets of old] a memorial for you, and that remembering ears (that heard the story) might remember.

9:70. Hath not the fame of those [infidels of old] before them reached them [present infidels] the folk of Noah, Aad, Thamud, the folk of Abraham, the dwellers of Midian and the disasters (which befell them)? Their [the infidels of old] messengers (from Allah) came unto them with proofs (of Allah's sovereignty). So Allah surely wronged them not, but they [infidels] did wrong themselves.

26:69. Recite unto them the Story of Abraham: [v 69-104]

41:13. But if they [infidels] turn away, then say [O Muhammad]: I warn you of a thunderbolt like the thunderbolt (which fell of old upon the tribes) of Aad and Thamud;

46:21. And make mention (O Muhammad) of the brother of Aad when he warned his folk [infidels] among the wind curved sand hills and verily warners came and went before and after him saying: Serve none but Allah. Lo! I fear for you [infidels] the doom of a tremendous Day.

7:101. Such were the townships. We relate some tidings of them unto thee (Muhammad). Their messengers verily came unto them [infidels] with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), but they [infidels] could not believe because they [infidels] had before denied. Thus doth Allah print upon the hearts of disbelievers [infidels] (that they hear not).

11:100. That is (something) of the tidings of the townships' (which were destroyed of old). We relate it unto thee (Muhammad). Some of them are standing and some (already) reaped.

11:103. Lo! herein verily [tidings of the townships' ] there is a portent for those who fear the doom of the Hereafter. That is a Day unto which mankind will be gathered, and that is a day that will be witnessed.

26:103. Lo! Herein [Story of Abraham] is indeed a portent, yet most of them [infidels] are not believers!

7:176. … Narrate [QSS: qasas] unto them [Children of Adam] the history (of the men of old), that haply they may take thought.

11:100. That is (something) of the tidings of the townships' (which were destroyed of old). We relate it unto thee (Muhammad). Some of them are standing and some (already) reaped.

12:111. In their [messengers'] history verily there is a lesson for men of understanding. … …

14:9. Hath not the history of those before you reached you [Muhammad]: the folk of Noah. and (the tribes of) Aad and Thamud, and those after them? None save Allah knoweth them. Their messengers came unto them with clear proofs, but they thrust their hands into their mouths, and said: Lo! we disbelieve in that wherewith ye have been sent, and lo! we are in grave doubt concerning that to which ye call us.

19:41. And make mention (O Muhammad) in the Scripture of Abraham. Lo! He [Abraham] was a saint [SDQ; ṣiddīqan], a Prophet.

50:37. Lo! therein verily is a reminder for him [Muslims] who hath a heart, or giveth ear [l-samʿa] with full intelligence.. [shahīdun; witness]
​

Note Allah in the above verses stressed the importance of the history of the messengers of old.
So it is similar when Allah telling the stories of Muhammad and his warring with and killing of the Qureshi to present the principles that all Muslims must comply with under similar circumstances.

Therefore the verses in Chapter 9 and others similar verses CANNOT be merely confined to the historical period involved, but these are verses representing the eternal principles that all Muslims must adopt against non-Muslims under similar conditions.

That the majority of Muslims do not comply with the warring and killing of non-Muslims is not because they are good Muslims, but rather they are good compassionate human beings or are ignorant of what they need to comply.
In this case these majority of Muslims who are good human beings are actually not-so-good Muslims who will likely face Allah's wrath on Judgment Day for not complying with Allah's command fully.

Hi Joyousperson,

Good and thorough explanation showing that the Qur'an, just as with the Bible, is not just a book of past history events. Rather, the Qur'anic revelation was compiled to be remembered, followed and obeyed, as Allah keeps warning the believers to do.

As well, just as you have clearly evidenced, the Qur'an keeps saying that it confirms Torah and the Gospel. This means the Torah and Gospel were still relevant and to be followed - especially by the Christians and Jews.

Qur'an 4:136 O you who believe! Believe in Allah, and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and the Book (the Qur'an) which He has sent down to His Messenger, and the Scripture (of the Jews and Christians) which He sent down to those before (him). And whosoever does not believe in Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day, then indeed he has strayed far away.

Qur'an 4:152 And those who believe in Allah and His Messengers and make no distinction between any of them (Messengers), We shall give them their rewards, and Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Qur'an 5:68 Say: "O People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Torah, the Gospel and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord...."

Qur'an 5:48 And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad) the Book (this Qur'an) in truth, confirming the Scripture [ma bayna yadayhi: "that which is with you," (the Taurat (Torah) and the Gospel (Injeel) and [Mohayminan: trustworthy in highness and a watcher] over it (the previous Scriptures). So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging away from the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so strive as in a race in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ.

 

[Norbert L]

The main attention and focus must be on the evil and violent elements within the ideology of Islam.

One problem is the ideology of Islam within the Quran [& supporting texts] is extremely difficult to grasp in its totality. Thus the first attention is to ensure the Quran and its essence is easily understood by all. This is a difficult task, but must be undertaken with an academic, objective and philosophical basis.

Views?

There are a few Christian apologists who specialize in debating their counter parts from Islam. One of them has various media platforms such as a YouTube channel dedicated to examining the Koran and the other authoritative books they have.

Acts17Apologetics

 

[JosephZ]

You give yourself too much credit to think you can interpret the Qur'an better than the Tafsir, or that you know what all the Muslims are thinking. I mean no disrespect, but that sounds unusual and prideful to me.

What I quoted below is from the source you provided, what are you talking about?

The link you provided confirms what I said in my reply to you. I will just pick some of the more relevant portions of the article to show this.

The declaration of Barā’at (immunity) was for the infidels’ perjury which has been referred to in verses 7 and 8 of the current Surah. In Islam, the general law is that promises should be fulfilled, and as long as the opposite party is faithful to the treaty, it should be kept, too.

The addressee ‘you’ in the sentence: “towards those of the polytheists with whom you made covenant ” is both the Messenger of Allah (S) and the Muslims. Thus, it means that they should declare immunity unto the polytheists between whom and them there was an agreement, because Allah (s.w.t.) and His Messenger (S) are quit of them.

The objective meaning here is that Allah (s.w.t.) and His Messenger (S) are quit of giving a promise to them and, after that, fulfilling it, because the polytheists who made covenants with them broke their promises.

That covenant was not a permanent (and an absolute) treaty, but it was bound over a definite point of time and for a certain length of time, so that when its term was ended that covenant would be broken, either.

It has also been pointed out in some traditions that the Messenger of Allah (S) had conditioned the above mentioned matters with them in the treaty. It has also been narrated that the idolaters broke their promise or decided to break it.

Then, Allah, the Glorified, commanded His Prophet to break their covenant, too Next to that, through the following verse, Allah, the Glorified, addressing the idolaters, says:

The Qur’ānic phrase: “So go about in the earth freely…” addresses the pagans of Mecca meaning that they could go about freely, and with peace of mind, in the land of Mecca and, being in easy circumstances.

“…for four months…” which means when this time was ended and the pagans did not embrace Islam, the string of their covenant would be broken and the security of life and wealth would be removed from them.

“Except those of the polytheists with whom you made covenant, and who have not failed you in anything nor have supported anyone against you. Then fulfil their treaty with them until (the end of) their term; surely Allah loves the pious ones.”

This unilateral cancellation of pagans’ covenants related only to those pagans from whom some signs of perjury, or preparation of perjury, had been appeared. This harshness of action is for the sake that Islam’s plan is to root out idolatry from the whole points of the earth, since idolatry is not a creed or religion which could be respected.

Section 1: Immunity Declared

Your source confirms what I had told you earlier about Chapter 9.

Chapter 9 is addressed to a very specific audience at a very specific point of time in history. If you ever take the time to take some courses in Islamic Studies, you will be taught about the historical and textual context that these verses and others found in the Qur'an were written.

I gave you the sources that do just that. I tell you what, I am already familiar with the sources. But, since you don't read the sources I give you, why don't you do your own honest research. It's all online for anyone to retrieve.

I have read all of the sources you provided and none of them gave cross references to the verses that were supposedly abrogated.

Oh, now you say that. Too convenient an excuse. You enrolled in his course and got a certificate from him. You seemed really proud of that achievement and learned that Muslims are really peaceful and Islam is peace. Right! Now that you realize you have been had by a Muslim using Takyah on you who really supports terrorism while deceiving you, the story seems to change.

No, I told you this earlier in the thread.

The founder of this school and the professor of those courses is Dr. Bilal Philips, a Sunni Salafi fundamentalist. He was even arrested here in Davao City and banned from returning to the Philippines because of his suspected ties to extremists.

DAVAO CITY: Police and immigration agents on Sunday arrested in this city Canadian Muslim scholar and professor Dr. Abu Ameen Bilal Philips, whom authorities suspect has ties with some Muslim radical extremist groups. Philips, who has been banned from entering the United States and the United Kingdom, was conducting a lecture in a predominantly Muslim village when he was invited for questioning and subsequently held in custody by authorities.

Since countering violent extremism is incorporated into our ministry here, the above is the reason why I enrolled in his courses so that I could have a better understanding of what he teaches since he is popular among many of the Muslims in the communities we work in.

I have also said this in another thread back in June.

The founder of this school and the professor of those courses is Dr. Bilal Philips, a Sunni Salafi fundamentalist. He was even arrested here in Davao City and banned from returning to the Philippines because of his suspected ties to extremists...

Since countering violent extremism is incorporated into our ministry here, the above is the reason why I enrolled in his courses so that I could have a better understanding of what he teaches since he is popular among many of the Muslims in the communities we work in.

And here's a post I made way back in February.

Part of our ministry here in Mindanao is countering violent extremism since the youth in the communities we work in are often the targets of recruiters for terrorist organizations. I often take classes and attend forums related to violent extremism and terrorism in order to keep up to date on the latest trends.

So as you can see, my story doesn't change and has remained consistent.

using Joseph's logic - that the Christian Scripture do not apply to our day and time. Funny, when the situation is turned around like this, then comes the defense of the Christian Scriptures. Well, I firmly believe in the Christian Scriptures, and that they are for us today, just as I believe the Qur'an, although formed earlier, address the faith of Muslims to this day. And what I am saying is absolutely accurate.

Good and thorough explanation showing that the Qur'an, just as with the Bible, is not just a book of past history events. Rather, the Qur'anic revelation was compiled to be remembered, followed and obeyed, as Allah keeps warning the believers to do.

The books found in the Old Testament like the first five that also make up the Jewish Torah give an historical account of the creation of the earth, mankind, and what God revealed to His people through Moses; Joshua, Judges, and Ruth tell the earliest history of Israel; The books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles record the fall of Judah to Babylon over a period of several centuries; Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther are about Israel's time in captivity, how they were freed from bondage, and the restoration of Jerusalem. The Books of prophesy found in the Bible are all addressed to specific audiences, primarily Israel.

The four gospels found in the New Testament are the recorded history of Jesus' ministry on earth and give us an accurate record of much of what Jesus said during that time; the book of Acts chronicles the history of the church immediately following Jesus' ascension; and the letters to Paul are all addressed to specific audiences or individuals. I didn't cover every book found in the Bible, but not one of them is addressed to Christians living in 2019.

The Bible was not written to Christians living today, but it was written and preserved by God for Christians living today. This is the key to understanding the Bible. With guidance from the Holy Spirit the Bible can enlighten us and can be applied to our daily lives in the way God intended.

So in a sense, the Bible is a historical collection of books and through reading it we can see how God dealt with people and certain circumstances in the past and from that we can get a pretty good idea on how God would deal with similar circumstances today. We also have a record of the Word of God through Jesus Christ that teaches us (Christians) what He expects from us as believers and how we are to deal with circumstances in our daily lives and how we are to deal with others.

Muslims have a whole religion based on following the commands and examples of Muhammad, even dressing like him. Nothing has changed for them - they are still living in the 7th century.

Do you mean dressing like this?

I think you are equating Arabs to Muslims.

Below are some pictures of Christians in Ethiopia.

What century do you think the above Christians are living in?

And I'm pretty certain Muslims weren't living in cities like this in the 7th century.

 

[setst777]

What I quoted below is from the source you provided, what are you talking about?
View attachment 259236

Hi Joseph,

You write:
<<
What I quoted below is from the source you provided, what are you talking about?

Your source confirms what I had told you earlier about Chapter 9.
>>

setst RE: What is it you said in particular that the source confirms regarding Chapter 9?

What I gather from the source by reading it is that, we know that the truce that Allah made with the unbelievers was temporary. After that truce ended, another truce was made with those unbelievers who did not know or understand and were peaceable (did not cause trouble). This also was temporary, giving them the opportunity to repent. However, unbelievers could not continue to exist in their unbelief. The unrepentant polytheists and all other unbelievers, except for the Jews and Christians, were to be killed. The Jews and Christians were given an opportunity not to be killed if they agreed to live peaceably among the Muslims and pay the Jizyah remain subjected to Islam (vs 9:5; 9:29; 9:33)

<<
5. “Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the polytheists wherever you find them, and seize them and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. But if they repent and perform the prayer and pay the poor-rate, (zakāt) then leave their way free to them; verily Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”

In this verse, the duty of Muslims towards pagans after their respite, which was four months, has been stated, where the most intensive instruction has been issued upon them. It says:

“Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the polytheists wherever you find them…”
>> [https://www.al-islam.org on Surah 9]

<<
29. “Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor do they prohibit, what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of Truth, out of those who have been given the Book until they pay the (Jizyah) tributory tax with their hand and they remain subjected.”

For this very reason, Islam does not permit that they (Jews and Christians) should be killed, while it issued this permission about the idolaters who insisted on their belief, because the program of Islam has been to root out idolatry from the whole earth.
>> [https://www.al-islam.org on Surah 9]

<<
33. “He it is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of Truth, that He may prevail it over all religions, though the polytheists may detest it.”

At last, by the means of this verse, the Muslims have been given the glad tidings of the spread of Islam through the world. In this way, the Qur’ān has completed the content of the previous verse indicating that the efforts of the opponents of Islam result nothing for them.
>> [https://www.al-islam.org on Surah 9]

The source"al-islam.org" gives an interpretation that agrees with the top mufassirun of Islam, as I quoted earlier...

Muhsin Khan, [1927 AD the translator of Sahih al-Bukhari and the Qur'an, entitled The Noble Qur'an, which he completed along with Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali], says God revealed "Ultimatum" in order to discard restraint and to command Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam or until they pay religious taxes. So, at first aggressive fighting was forbidden; it later became permissible (2:190) and subsequently obligatory (9:5).
[Muhsin Khan, "Introduction," in ibid., pp. xxiv-xxv.]

This "verse of the sword" (9:5) abrogated, canceled, and replaced 124 verses that called for tolerance, compassion, and peace.
[Ibn Hazm, An-Nasikh wal-Mansukh, pp. 19, 27; Muhi al-Din Ibn al-'Arabi, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Krim (Beirut: Dar al-Andalus, 1978), p. 69; Burton, The Encyclopedia of Islam, vol. 7, s.v. "Naskh," p. 1010; Salama, An-Nasikh wal-Mansukh, p. 130, mentioned only 114.]

Suyuti [1445–1505 AD; aka Jalaluddin; an Egyptian of Persian origin. Historian, biographer, jurist, teacher and scholar of Islamic theology; he was one of the most prolific writers of the Middle Ages.] Suyuti said that everything in the Qur'an about forgiveness and peace is abrogated by verse 9:5, which orders Muslims to fight the unbelievers and to establish God's kingdom on earth
[Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi ‘Ulum al-Qur'an, part 1, pp. 60, 65, 164.]
Suyuti writes regarding Chapter 9 of the Qur'an, in English called "Ultimatum," is the most important concerning the issues of abrogation and jihad against unbelievers. It is the only chapter that does not begin "in the name of God, most benevolent, ever-merciful."
[See explanations, Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi ‘Ulum al-Qur'an, part 1, pp. 60, 65, 164.]

Isma'il bin Kathir [1301-1373 AD, was a student under Ibn Taymiyya and an influential Qur'an interpreter]: bin Kathir, in his commentary on Chapter 9:5, expressed that jihad involves death and the killing of men, God draws attention to the fact that disbelief, polytheism, and avoidance of God's path as shown by the Qur'an are worse than killing them.
[Ibn Kathir, Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, vol. 4, pp. 375-7.]

According to bin Kathir in his commentary on Chapter 9:5, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, the first caliph, used this and other verses to validate fighting anyone who either did not pay religious taxes to the Muslims or convert to Islam. Ibn ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab, one of the hadith transmitters, quoted Muhammad as saying, "I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God." He testified that Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim, an authentic transmitter of hadiths, said that the verse of the sword"abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term." ‘Awfi cited Ibn ‘Abbas, who argued that "Ultimatum" obviated earlier peace treaties.
[Ibn Kathir, Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, vol. 4, pp. 375-7.]

Mohammed Said Ramadan Al-Bouti [Notable Sunni Muslim scholar (a contemporary Al-Azhar University scholar) who was also known as "Shaykh of the Levant". Called a "prolific writer whose sermons were regularly broadcast on television," and "more familiar to Syrian TV viewers than anybody other than President Bashar al-Assad", Al-Bouti authored more than sixty books on various Islamic issues, and was considered an important scholar of the approach based on the four schools of Sunni Islam and the orthodox Ash'arite creed - the foremost theological school of Sunni Islam which established an orthodox dogmatic guideline based on clerical authority, founded by the Arab theologian Abu al-Hasan al-Ashʿari (d. 936 / AH 324)]. Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti wrote that "the verse (9:5) does not leave any room in the mind to conjecture about what is called defensive war. This verse asserts that holy war, which is demanded in Islamic law, is not a defensive war because it could legitimately be an offensive war. That is the apex and most honorable of all holy wars. Its goal is the exaltation of the word of God, the construction of Islamic society, and the establishment of God's kingdom on earth regardless of the means. It is legal to carry on an offensive holy war."

Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti also wrote that defensive warfare in Islam is nothing but a phase of the Islamic mission that the Prophet practiced. After that, it was followed by another phase; that is, calling all people to embrace Islam. Even for People of the Book, there can be no role except conversion to Islam or subjugation to Muslim rule. Hence, Muhammad's statement, "They would not invade you, but you invade them."
[Muhammad Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti, Jurisprudence in Muhammad's Biography (Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 2001), pp. 323-4.]

Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti also wrote:
"The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message ..."’
[Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography, p 134, 7th edition]

In what way does any of this support what you said about Chapter 9? And if your interpretation does not agree with the Islamic scholarship or al-islam.org, what makes you think your interpretation trumps the most renowned mufassirun of Islam?

Joseph writes:
<<
Chapter 9 is addressed to a very specific audience at a very specific point of time in history. If you ever take the time to take some courses in Islamic Studies, you will be taught about the historical and textual context that these verses and others found in the Qur'an were written.
>>

setst RE: Don't we know that? Isn't that what I have repeatedly said to you? The commands of Jesus and the examples Jesus gave us from His own life, his Parables and His teachings, and the instruction of the Apostles to the churches, were to a specific audience at a specific time in history; yet, all the commands and teaching given to that historical context are binding on all Christians today unless addressing a cultural issue of that day.

1 John 2:3-6 (NIV)
3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, love for God is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

Likewise, the commands of Allah were given at a point in time in a specific context, but the commands of Allah, and the example, teaching and sayings of Muhammad, including how he dressed, what he ate, how he washed, how he went to the bathroom, and all manner of details like this, are for all time unless abrogated by later verses - until the whole world was under Islam.

Joseph writes:
<<
I have read all of the sources you provided and none of them gave cross references to the verses that were supposedly abrogated.
>>

setst RE: Here were the sources:

Muhsin Khan, [1927 AD the translator of Sahih al-Bukhari and the Qur'an, entitled The Noble Qur'an, which he completed along with Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali], says God revealed "Ultimatum" in order to discard restraint and to command Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam or until they pay religious taxes. So, at first aggressive fighting was forbidden; it later became permissible (2:190) and subsequently obligatory (9:5).
[Muhsin Khan, "Introduction," in ibid., pp. xxiv-xxv.]

And also (highly credible open-source document)
List of Abrogations in the Qur'an - WikiIslam

You actually have to read the sources I give you, so we don't have to keep repeating the same thing over and over. As well, I include one more source for you that just uses the best Islamic sources. The sources themselves show examples of abrogated verses.

Abrogated Verses Of the Quran: Evidence from the Hadith Collection

Yes, it is from answering-islam, but the information is completely factual from the original most reliable sources.

Joseph (in regards to Dr. Bilal Philips) writes:
<<
No, I told you this earlier in the thread.
>>

setst RE: I am sure you did, and I do remember that. But you listed that among the reputable schools you attended in your 30 years of study, so that confirmed to me that you approved of that school and its teaching - since you said repeatedly that you were not aware of any reputable school that teaches what I am saying about Islam.

Joseph writes:
<<
The Bible was not written to Christians living today, but it was written and preserved by God for Christians living today. This is the key to understanding the Bible. With guidance from the Holy Spirit the Bible can enlighten us and can be applied to our daily lives in the way God intended.
>>

setst RE: Don't we know this? Isn't that what I have been saying to you? Don't you read my messages? What is your point?

Joseph, you then go into the dress of Muslims trying to prove that this was customary for all Arabs. You miss the point. Muslims dress the way they do because that is how Muhammad dressed and that is how Muhammad commanded women to dress. This is not difficult to understand. The Hadith, Sira, and actually Sharia, give detailed examples of how Muslims were to dress, eat, bathroom, pray, sleep, have sex, and the list goes on. Sharia, and all its detailed regulation about how Muslims are to live in every aspect of their lives, including dress, are founded on the Qur'an, the Sira and the Hadith. Why didn't you know this?

Joseph writes:
<<
And I'm pretty certain Muslims weren't living in cities like this in the 7th century.
>>

setst RE: What is your point? Muhammad gave no instruction or example about buildings. Nothing is written about how buildings are to be built anywhere in the Hadith, Sira, or the Quran, except that a Christian structure of worship in a Muslim controlled land may not be higher than a Muslim building.

You love to argue about everything, but what does this show about your knowledge of Islam and Muslims after saying you spent decades living with them and studying Islam for 30 years? You appear to lack any meaningful knowledge about Muslims or Islam. Makes me wonder if all you are saying is just fibs.

 

[Joyousperson]

Hi Joyousperson,

Good and thorough explanation showing that the Qur'an, just as with the Bible, is not just a book of past history events. Rather, the Qur'anic revelation was compiled to be remembered, followed and obeyed, as Allah keeps warning the believers to do.

As well, just as you have clearly evidenced, the Qur'an keeps saying that it confirms Torah and the Gospel. This means the Torah and Gospel were still relevant and to be followed - especially by the Christians and Jews.

Qur'an 4:136 O you who believe! Believe in Allah, and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and the Book (the Qur'an) which He has sent down to His Messenger, and the Scripture (of the Jews and Christians) which He sent down to those before (him). And whosoever does not believe in Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day, then indeed he has strayed far away.

Qur'an 4:152 And those who believe in Allah and His Messengers and make no distinction between any of them (Messengers), We shall give them their rewards, and Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Qur'an 5:68 Say: "O People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Torah, the Gospel and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord...."

Qur'an 5:48 And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad) the Book (this Qur'an) in truth, confirming the Scripture [ma bayna yadayhi: "that which is with you," (the Taurat (Torah) and the Gospel (Injeel) and [Mohayminan: trustworthy in highness and a watcher] over it (the previous Scriptures). So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging away from the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so strive as in a race in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ.

Christians believed Islam and the Quran is from a false God and false prophet.
Thus is not something that is credible for a false God and false prophet to confirm the Bible in some instances and condemned the present Bible as corrupted in other instances.

I have read many arguments from Christians, e.g. David Wood, Sam Shamoun, Jay Smith and others who argued convincingly how the Gospels, epistles, acts and OT in the hands of the majority of Christianity at present contain the authentic doctrines from the Christian God which was written down around 2000 years ago.

 

[Joyousperson]

There are a few Christian apologists who specialize in debating their counter parts from Islam. One of them has various media platforms such as a YouTube channel dedicated to examining the Koran and the other authoritative books they have.

Acts17Apologetics

Yes,
Another who is a more sharper apologist is Christian Prince.
Christian Prince
Christian Prince is a Coptic Christian [if not mistaken] who is an Arab [thus with advantage of Arabic] and had a degree in Islamic Studies from the Middle East.

Another is Al Fadi, a Saudi Muslim who converted to Christianity,

 

[Joyousperson]

Hi Joseph,

You write:
<<
What I quoted below is from the source you provided, what are you talking about?

Your source confirms what I had told you earlier about Chapter 9.
>>

setst RE: What is it you said in particular that the source confirms regarding Chapter 9?

What I gather from the source by reading it is that, we know that the truce that Allah made with the unbelievers was temporary. After that truce ended, another truce was made with those unbelievers who did not know or understand and were peaceable (did not cause trouble). This also was temporary, giving them the opportunity to repent. However, unbelievers could not continue to exist in their unbelief. The unrepentant polytheists and all other unbelievers, except for the Jews and Christians, were to be killed. The Jews and Christians were given an opportunity not to be killed if they agreed to live peaceably among the Muslims and pay the Jizyah remain subjected to Islam (vs 9:5; 9:29; 9:33)

<<
5. “Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the polytheists wherever you find them, and seize them and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. But if they repent and perform the prayer and pay the poor-rate, (zakāt) then leave their way free to them; verily Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”

In this verse, the duty of Muslims towards pagans after their respite, which was four months, has been stated, where the most intensive instruction has been issued upon them. It says:

“Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the polytheists wherever you find them…”
>> [https://www.al-islam.org on Surah 9]

<<
29. “Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor do they prohibit, what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of Truth, out of those who have been given the Book until they pay the (Jizyah) tributory tax with their hand and they remain subjected.”

For this very reason, Islam does not permit that they (Jews and Christians) should be killed, while it issued this permission about the idolaters who insisted on their belief, because the program of Islam has been to root out idolatry from the whole earth.
>> [https://www.al-islam.org on Surah 9]

<<
33. “He it is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of Truth, that He may prevail it over all religions, though the polytheists may detest it.”

At last, by the means of this verse, the Muslims have been given the glad tidings of the spread of Islam through the world. In this way, the Qur’ān has completed the content of the previous verse indicating that the efforts of the opponents of Islam result nothing for them.
>> [https://www.al-islam.org on Surah 9]

The source"al-islam.org" gives an interpretation that agrees with the top mufassirun of Islam, as I quoted earlier...

Muhsin Khan, [1927 AD the translator of Sahih al-Bukhari and the Qur'an, entitled The Noble Qur'an, which he completed along with Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali], says God revealed "Ultimatum" in order to discard restraint and to command Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam or until they pay religious taxes. So, at first aggressive fighting was forbidden; it later became permissible (2:190) and subsequently obligatory (9:5).
[Muhsin Khan, "Introduction," in ibid., pp. xxiv-xxv.]

This "verse of the sword" (9:5) abrogated, canceled, and replaced 124 verses that called for tolerance, compassion, and peace.
[Ibn Hazm, An-Nasikh wal-Mansukh, pp. 19, 27; Muhi al-Din Ibn al-'Arabi, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Krim (Beirut: Dar al-Andalus, 1978), p. 69; Burton, The Encyclopedia of Islam, vol. 7, s.v. "Naskh," p. 1010; Salama, An-Nasikh wal-Mansukh, p. 130, mentioned only 114.]

Suyuti [1445–1505 AD; aka Jalaluddin; an Egyptian of Persian origin. Historian, biographer, jurist, teacher and scholar of Islamic theology; he was one of the most prolific writers of the Middle Ages.] Suyuti said that everything in the Qur'an about forgiveness and peace is abrogated by verse 9:5, which orders Muslims to fight the unbelievers and to establish God's kingdom on earth
[Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi ‘Ulum al-Qur'an, part 1, pp. 60, 65, 164.]
Suyuti writes regarding Chapter 9 of the Qur'an, in English called "Ultimatum," is the most important concerning the issues of abrogation and jihad against unbelievers. It is the only chapter that does not begin "in the name of God, most benevolent, ever-merciful."
[See explanations, Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi ‘Ulum al-Qur'an, part 1, pp. 60, 65, 164.]

Isma'il bin Kathir [1301-1373 AD, was a student under Ibn Taymiyya and an influential Qur'an interpreter]: bin Kathir, in his commentary on Chapter 9:5, expressed that jihad involves death and the killing of men, God draws attention to the fact that disbelief, polytheism, and avoidance of God's path as shown by the Qur'an are worse than killing them.
[Ibn Kathir, Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, vol. 4, pp. 375-7.]

According to bin Kathir in his commentary on Chapter 9:5, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, the first caliph, used this and other verses to validate fighting anyone who either did not pay religious taxes to the Muslims or convert to Islam. Ibn ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab, one of the hadith transmitters, quoted Muhammad as saying, "I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God." He testified that Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim, an authentic transmitter of hadiths, said that the verse of the sword"abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term." ‘Awfi cited Ibn ‘Abbas, who argued that "Ultimatum" obviated earlier peace treaties.
[Ibn Kathir, Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, vol. 4, pp. 375-7.]

Mohammed Said Ramadan Al-Bouti [Notable Sunni Muslim scholar (a contemporary Al-Azhar University scholar) who was also known as "Shaykh of the Levant". Called a "prolific writer whose sermons were regularly broadcast on television," and "more familiar to Syrian TV viewers than anybody other than President Bashar al-Assad", Al-Bouti authored more than sixty books on various Islamic issues, and was considered an important scholar of the approach based on the four schools of Sunni Islam and the orthodox Ash'arite creed - the foremost theological school of Sunni Islam which established an orthodox dogmatic guideline based on clerical authority, founded by the Arab theologian Abu al-Hasan al-Ashʿari (d. 936 / AH 324)]. Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti wrote that "the verse (9:5) does not leave any room in the mind to conjecture about what is called defensive war. This verse asserts that holy war, which is demanded in Islamic law, is not a defensive war because it could legitimately be an offensive war. That is the apex and most honorable of all holy wars. Its goal is the exaltation of the word of God, the construction of Islamic society, and the establishment of God's kingdom on earth regardless of the means. It is legal to carry on an offensive holy war."

Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti also wrote that defensive warfare in Islam is nothing but a phase of the Islamic mission that the Prophet practiced. After that, it was followed by another phase; that is, calling all people to embrace Islam. Even for People of the Book, there can be no role except conversion to Islam or subjugation to Muslim rule. Hence, Muhammad's statement, "They would not invade you, but you invade them."
[Muhammad Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti, Jurisprudence in Muhammad's Biography (Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 2001), pp. 323-4.]

Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti also wrote:
"The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message ..."’
[Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography, p 134, 7th edition]

In what way does any of this support what you said about Chapter 9? And if your interpretation does not agree with the Islamic scholarship or al-islam.org, what makes you think your interpretation trumps the most renowned mufassirun of Islam?

Joseph writes:
<<
Chapter 9 is addressed to a very specific audience at a very specific point of time in history. If you ever take the time to take some courses in Islamic Studies, you will be taught about the historical and textual context that these verses and others found in the Qur'an were written.
>>

setst RE: Don't we know that? Isn't that what I have repeatedly said to you? The commands of Jesus and the examples Jesus gave us from His own life, his Parables and His teachings, and the instruction of the Apostles to the churches, were to a specific audience at a specific time in history; yet, all the commands and teaching given to that historical context are binding on all Christians today unless addressing a cultural issue of that day.

1 John 2:3-6 (NIV)
3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, love for God is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

Likewise, the commands of Allah were given at a point in time in a specific context, but the commands of Allah, and the example, teaching and sayings of Muhammad, including how he dressed, what he ate, how he washed, how he went to the bathroom, and all manner of details like this, are for all time unless abrogated by later verses - until the whole world was under Islam.

Joseph writes:
<<
I have read all of the sources you provided and none of them gave cross references to the verses that were supposedly abrogated.
>>

setst RE: Here were the sources:

Muhsin Khan, [1927 AD the translator of Sahih al-Bukhari and the Qur'an, entitled The Noble Qur'an, which he completed along with Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali], says God revealed "Ultimatum" in order to discard restraint and to command Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam or until they pay religious taxes. So, at first aggressive fighting was forbidden; it later became permissible (2:190) and subsequently obligatory (9:5).
[Muhsin Khan, "Introduction," in ibid., pp. xxiv-xxv.]

And also (highly credible open-source document)
List of Abrogations in the Qur'an - WikiIslam

You actually have to read the sources I give you, so we don't have to keep repeating the same thing over and over. As well, I include one more source for you that just uses the best Islamic sources. The sources themselves show examples of abrogated verses.

Abrogated Verses Of the Quran: Evidence from the Hadith Collection

Yes, it is from answering-islam, but the information is completely factual from the original most reliable sources.

Joseph (in regards to Dr. Bilal Philips) writes:
<<
No, I told you this earlier in the thread.
>>

setst RE: I am sure you did, and I do remember that. But you listed that among the reputable schools you attended in your 30 years of study, so that confirmed to me that you approved of that school and its teaching - since you said repeatedly that you were not aware of any reputable school that teaches what I am saying about Islam.

Joseph writes:
<<
The Bible was not written to Christians living today, but it was written and preserved by God for Christians living today. This is the key to understanding the Bible. With guidance from the Holy Spirit the Bible can enlighten us and can be applied to our daily lives in the way God intended.
>>

setst RE: Don't we know this? Isn't that what I have been saying to you? Don't you read my messages? What is your point?

Joseph, you then go into the dress of Muslims trying to prove that this was customary for all Arabs. You miss the point. Muslims dress the way they do because that is how Muhammad dressed and that is how Muhammad commanded women to dress. This is not difficult to understand. The Hadith, Sira, and actually Sharia, give detailed examples of how Muslims were to dress, eat, bathroom, pray, sleep, have sex, and the list goes on. Sharia, and all its detailed regulation about how Muslims are to live in every aspect of their lives, including dress, are founded on the Qur'an, the Sira and the Hadith. Why didn't you know this?

Joseph writes:
<<
And I'm pretty certain Muslims weren't living in cities like this in the 7th century.
>>

setst RE: What is your point? Muhammad gave no instruction or example about buildings. Nothing is written about how buildings are to be built anywhere in the Hadith, Sira, or the Quran, except that a Christian structure of worship in a Muslim controlled land may not be higher than a Muslim building.

You love to argue about everything, but what does this show about your knowledge of Islam and Muslims after saying you spent decades living with them and studying Islam for 30 years? You appear to lack any meaningful knowledge about Muslims or Islam. Makes me wonder if all you are saying is just fibs.

Super arguments in countering JosephZ's flimsy arguments.

What JosephZ is relying on is merely the superficial thinking and outer behaviors of the majority of Muslims but he is ignorant of the essence of the ideology of Islam.

Thus when he argued on such superficial grounds his points are based on flimsy, groundless, and toothless arguments.

Note his counter showing the dressing of the Ethiopian Christians [tradition in the Middle East and Northern Africa] which is very narrow based on ignorance. But such dressings are not followed by Christians all over the world.

On the other hand, Muslims all over the world are trying to dress, kept his style of beard and behave [worst, kill] like Prophet Muhammad, e.g. this in Indonesia and elsewhere.