The Bible said that??!!

[Bluegazer]

The following two passages from the Bible have already been mentioned by TheHumbleWun in posts 22 and 39. I'll mention them again, according to both the [Catholic] New American Bible and the [Protestant] King James Version:

"If, despite all this, you still persist in disobeying and defying me, I, also, will meet you with fiery defiance and will chastise you with sevenfold fiercer punishment for your sins, till you begin to eat the flesh of your own sons and daughters.

Leviticus 26:27-29 (New American Bible)

And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me; Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.

Leviticus 26:27-29 (King James Version)


---------------------------

If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.

Matthew 18:8-9 (New American Bible)

Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

Matthew 18:8-9 (King James Version)

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum TheHumbleWun,


No need to apologize, brother. And thanks for understanding and agreeing with my comments.


Regarding the punishment for adultery for Christian men, I'm not sure there's anything specific about it. I do know that there's the Story of the Adulteress [John 7:53-8:11] where Jesus is said to have not stoned a woman caught in adultery, but I have mentioned and proved in several posts that Christian sources admit this story was not found in the earliest Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of John [i.e., it is a forgery].


I'm sorry I can't help you on this. Maybe one of the readers of this post knows the answer?

 

[Raihan]

Real Terrorism, Genocide, Racism and Hatred in the Bible

Terrorism and Genocide on innocent people:

Jesus says: "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I come not to send peace, but a sword." [Matthew 10:34]

"Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women." [Ezekiel 9:5-6]

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." [1 Samuel 15:3]

" They fought against Midian; as the LORD commanded Moses, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." [Numbers 31:7, 17-18]

Jesus says: "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." [Luke 12:51-2]

Jesus says: "But those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." [Luke 19:27]

Jesus says: "I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law." [Matthew 10:35-6]

Jesus says: "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." [John 15:6]

"Slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour." [Exodus 32:27]

"Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished." [Isaiah 13:16]

"And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males." [Numbers 31:7]

"And he smote them hip and thigh with a great slaughter: and he went down and dwelt in the top of the rock Etam." [Judges 15:8]

"Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword." [Deuteronomy 13:15]

"And when the tabernacle setteth forward, the Levites shall take it down: and when the tabernacle is to be pitched, the Levites shall set it up: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death." [Numbers 1:51]

"But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee." [Deuteronomy 20:17]

"Is not this David, of whom they sang one to another in dances, saying, Saul slew his thousands, and David his ten thousands?" [1 Samuel 29:5]

Jesus says: "And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear." [Matthew 26:51]

Jesus says: "Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem." [Matthew 2:16]

"Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God." [Deuteronomy 13:8-10]

"And he brought out the people that were in it, and cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes." [1 Chronicles 20:3]

"But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee." [Deuteronomy 20:14]

"And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain: Only the cattle we took for a prey unto ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took."
[Deuteronomy 2:34-35]

All non-Jews must be stoned to death:

"And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, .....and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die." [Deuteronomy 17:3-5]

"All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman." [2 Chronicles 15:13]

Hatred and Racism:

Jesus says: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." [Luke 14:26]

Jesus says: "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs (non-Jews), neither cast ye your pearls before swine (non-Jews)." [Matthew 7:6]

Jesus says: "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread and cast it to dogs (non-Jews)." [Matthew 15:24-26]

"Atheists are fool. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. They are filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one." [Psalms 14:1-3]

Honor killing:

Jesus says: "For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’" [Matthew 15:4]

The death of innocent people in the Bible:

“If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman MUST DIE.” [Deuteronomy 22:22]

"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death." [Leviticus 20:10]

Can you explain why one would be punished for saying ''you fool'' is this not too harsh? [Mathew 5:22]

Rape and the spoils of war:

“They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil.” (Judges 5:30)

“Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city.” (Zechariah 14:1-2)

These are just some samples! Tones of similar verses can be shown!

 

[Jibran]

Assalamu Alaikum brother Jibran,


In post #35, you quoted my statement from post #1 "And I say let's turn the tables on Christians who attack us in such a way." Then you wrote the following:




Thank you for your concern. However, I respectfully disagree with you.


Firstly, a Muslim has the duty to spread and propagate the religion of Islam. This also includes showing how other religions [in varying degrees] contain false doctrines and precepts. This does not make us Muslims "stoop to their level" because Muslims should not:

a) quote Biblical verses out of context
b) attack Biblical verses that contain elements also found in Islam


I have tried -to the best of my ability- to avoid point (a). As to point (b), please read my post #23 on this thread.


Secondly, there are many callers to Islam who actively used Biblical passages to show Christians that their beliefs are not based upon sound principles and evidence, such as Ahmed Deedat [may Allah have mercy on him].


And thirdly [and most important of all], Allah the Almighty has attacked blasphemous beliefs found in Judaism and Christianity. You have the following verses of the Qur'an:



[Translation of the meanings of the Qur'an 5:72-75]


The vast majority of Christians will find the above verses offensive. Does that mean that we Muslims should stop telling them that their worshiping of Jesus [peace be upon him] is associating a partner with God Almighty and therefore it is disbelief in God Almighty?


You also have the following verses of the Qur'an:



[Translation of the meanings of the Qur'an 3:181]




[Translation of the meanings of the Qur'an 5:64]


In the above two passages of the Qur'an, Allah attacks two blasphemous beliefs that Jews had uttered. Therefore, we Muslims could also attack any blasphemous belief that is found in the Bible.


For example, take a look at the following verses of the Bible:



Genesis 6:5-7 (King James Version)


And:



Exodus 31:17 (King James Version)


Don't you find, brother Jibran, that these Biblical verses contain blasphemies against Allah the Almighty? And therefore, don't we Muslims have the right and duty to highlight them and respond to them?


If you want to read a post of mine dealing with the above two Biblical verses, please click on the following link:

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=153168&postcount=124


The Dutch member of Parliament has released a film against Islam. It is filled with references that he sees as damning evidence against the Qur'an. And yet, what about the Biblical verses I quoted in my posts on this thread? Why did he attack Islam and yet say nothing about absolute bloodbaths mentioned and praised in the Bible?


Once many Westerners and other non Muslims ponder on this question, they'll see what a complete hypocrite he is. And that is why I started this thread so that any Muslim could have an easy time finding such Biblical verses.


Again, brother Jibran, I thank you for the advice. I just respectfully disagree with you for the reasons I have stated above.


Best regards,

Bluegazer

Wassalamu Alaikum

Salam. Brother Bluegazer i would like to reintegrate my suggesting to make myself clearer to you.

Firstly, you're not suppose to propagate islam (dawa) to muslims, but to non-muslims.

Secondly, Allah attacks the claims of non-muslims, so we may learn the truth through his words in the qu'ran. Attacking another religion out of spite because they're attacking our religion, is not what's commended of us. We may defend our religion, but 'turning the tables around' in such a fashion isn't going to make matters any better. As a matter of fact, Allah swa says in the quran to find common grounds with the believers (people of the book) instead of disputing our differences causing bad-blood. In other words, there's a difference between debating religion in a civilized way with someone, and actually attacking someone's faith out of spite.

And I say let's turn the tables on Christians who attack us in such a way.

We are allowed to challenge other religions, not disrespect them. If this isn't your intention, i would suggest you challenge christians upfront instead of on here. It's a muslims responsibility to learn about islam himself/herself and be able to defend. Scholars should be consulted by muslims with questions about islam. However, generally speaking, the knowledge is already out there, this is why the quran and hadith were provided and compiled... for guidance. We all have to be on our deen, and if we are, we will be able to defend our religion in a civil and humble manner, without having the need to chastise/disrespect the other persons faith as a counter-initiative of sorts. It is unnecessary and wrong to use those measures because it's vengeful, and will not make things better between the two of you (you and the christian/non-muslim)

Please view the quranic quotes below brother bluegazer

* And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit. [Qur'an 29:46]


YUSUFALI: And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."

PICKTHAL: And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender.

SHAKIR: And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit. (029.046)

It's best to find common-ground in such disputes, that are mere disputation and not an actual philosophical debate, remember "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation)"


Say (to Christians and Jews): “Would you dispute with us about Allah, while He is our God and your God? We are responsible for our deeds, and you for your deeds; and we are sincerely devoted to Him (alone).” [Chapter 2:139]

 

[TheHumbleWun]

Salaam brother Jibran,

You said:

We are allowed to challenge other religions, not disrespect them.

We're not attacking nor disrespecting anyone. We are quoting what the Bible states. A fact is a fact. This is just information that we can use when we are faced with challenges!

 

[Jibran]

Salaam brother Jibran,

You said:



We're not attacking nor disrespecting anyone. We are quoting what the Bible states. A fact is a fact. This is just information that we can use when we are faced with challenges!

Wa-salaam brother humblewun. This verse basically wraps up what im trying to say "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation)"
- 029.046

Brother humblewun let me reintegrate a little. I am basically repeating myself, but i hope i can make my issue more clearer to you.

We may defend our religion, but 'turning the tables around' in such a fashion isn't going to make matters any better. It's best to find common-ground in such disputes, that are mere disputation and not an actual philosophical debate for higher learning, remember "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation)"

Nothing positive can develop with that kind of retort. Both sides will be tarnishing each others views, and nothing productive will come out of it. We are always commended to do what's most befitting and correct as muslims, to do what's best in other words. We have to take proper measures in any situation after carefully assessing the circumstances surrounding the situation.

Challenging a religion is okay, useless arguing with a dose of spite isn't, because we have to do what's better in those situations. Common-grounds should be made between the both of you in that case, and that's whats better.

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum brother Jibran,


I thank you for post #45. I'll try to post a full response as soon as possible, so please be patient.


However, there's one major point I'd like to make in this post.


You wrote the following:

Please view the quranic quotes below brother bluegazer

* And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit. [Qur'an 29:46]


YUSUFALI: And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."

PICKTHAL: And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender.

SHAKIR: And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit. (029.046)

It's best to find common-ground in such disputes, that are mere disputation and not an actual philosophical debate, remember "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation)"


Say (to Christians and Jews): “Would you dispute with us about Allah, while He is our God and your God? We are responsible for our deeds, and you for your deeds; and we are sincerely devoted to Him (alone).” [Chapter 2:139]

And my response is simply what's written I have coloured red and set in bold type, like so:

And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit. [Qur'an 29:46]


YUSUFALI: And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."

PICKTHAL: And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender.

SHAKIR: And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit. (029.046)


Don't you agree, brother Jibran, that Geert Wilders [the Dutch MP who produced this anti-Islam film] and all who repeat and hold his views are of those "who act unjustly"?


I'll write a full response as soon as possible.


Best regards,

Bluegazer

 

[Jibran]

Assalamu Alaikum brother Jibran,


I thank you for post #45. I'll try to post a full response as soon as possible, so please be patient.


However, there's one major point I'd like to make in this post.


You wrote the following:




And my response is simply what's written I have coloured red and set in bold type, like so:

And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit. [Qur'an 29:46]


YUSUFALI: And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."

PICKTHAL: And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender.

SHAKIR: And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit. (029.046)


Don't you agree, brother Jibran, that Geert Wilders [the Dutch MP who produced this anti-Islam film] and all who repeat and hold his views are of those "who act unjustly"?


I'll write a full response as soon as possible.


Best regards,

Bluegazer

Walaikumsalam my dear brother.

I understand your point of view brother Bluegazer, however, i think that you should observe the next part of the verse "and say (to those who act unjustly): We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit."

That is the command and/or type of answer a muslim should respond with when dealing with those 'who act unjustly' in accordance to this type of circumstance.

Looking forward to your response though.

- Jibran

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum brother Jibran,


You wrote:

I understand your point of view brother Bluegazer, however, i think that you should observe the next part of the verse "and say (to those who act unjustly): We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit."

That is the command and/or type of answer a muslim should respond with when dealing with those 'who act unjustly' in accordance to this type of circumstance.

Where did you get the idea that we should say "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit" only to those who act unjustly?


The verses of the Qur'an that you referred to show us how to debate with the People of the Book. Allah ordered us to debate with them "by what is best". But what happens when they are of "those who act unjustly"? We stop arguing with them in a way that is best.


The verse commanding us to say "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit." means that this statement should be made to the People of the Book in general, meaning that this tatement should not be exclusive to only those who have acted unjustly. It's a continuation of the command, like so [My exaplanation and two dash signs in bold type red]:

And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, -except those of them who act unjustly- and say [i.e., to People of the Book whom you are debating with in a way that is best...those who don't act unjustly towards you and possibly even to those People of the Book who act unjustly]: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit.

If you really think about it, you'll find that I'm right. Are we supposed to say to the unjust People of the Book "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit." and not say this statement to just People of the Book?!


Meaning, don't the People of the Book -who act justly towards Muslims- deserve to hear Muslims tell them that "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit." ?


Best regards,

Bluegazer

 

[Jibran]

Assalamu Alaikum brother Jibran,


You wrote:




Where did you get the idea that we should say "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit" only to those who act unjustly?


The verses of the Qur'an that you referred to show us how to debate with the People of the Book. Allah ordered us to debate with them "by what is best". But what happens when they are of "those who act unjustly"? We stop arguing with them in a way that is best.


The verse commanding us to say "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit." means that this statement should be made to the People of the Book in general, meaning that this tatement should not be exclusive to only those who have acted unjustly. It's a continuation of the command, like so [My exaplanation and two dash signs in bold type red]:




If you really think about it, you'll find that I'm right. Are we supposed to say to the unjust People of the Book "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit." and not say this statement to just People of the Book?!


Meaning, don't the People of the Book -who act justly towards Muslims- deserve to hear Muslims tell them that "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit." ?


Best regards,

Bluegazer

Walaikum asalaam.

Brother Bluegazer, as regards to the verse in question, i agree with you, jazak allah for drawing this to my attention.

However, i would like to draw to your attention once again that we should not get into mere disputions either, as i've stated previously. Arguing for the sake of argument is belligerent and nothing positive will come out from that, only the negative. If we turned this into a grudge match with the christians by attacking and chastising each others faith, no-one will achieve anything but animosity for each other at the end..

Instead of counter-attacking christianity in the same method they're attacking islam, how about you debate in a more suttle and humble way, such as defending islam while questioning christianity and not attackng it?.. The muslim is suppose to be a great example of how non-muslims should live.

 

[danial]

i dont like this thread as an eye for and eye does not make the world a better place...

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum brother danial,


You wrote the following in post #52:

i dont like this thread as an eye for and eye does not make the world a better place...

The following is part of verse 45 of Surat Al-Maa'ida:

And We ordained therein for them: "Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation.

[Translation of the meanings of the Qur'an 5: part of verse 45]


So, the "eye for an eye" rule is a commandment of Allah the Almighty. Sure, Allah has allowed one to forgive [as the verse clearly shows], but a Muslim should not say that "an eye for and eye does not make the world a better place" since it's like saying that Allah does not know what makes this world a better place. [I seek refuge with Allah from such a saying].

 

[Jibran]

Assalamu Alaikum brother danial,


You wrote the following in post #52:




The following is part of verse 45 of Surat Al-Maa'ida:



[Translation of the meanings of the Qur'an 5: part of verse 45]


So, the "eye for an eye" rule is a commandment of Allah the Almighty. Sure, Allah has allowed one to forgive [as the verse clearly shows], but a Muslim should not say that "an eye for and eye does not make the world a better place" since it's like saying that Allah does not know what makes this world a better place. [I seek refuge with Allah from such a saying].

Salaam.

Brother Bluegazer, the law of an eye for an eye is just that, a law. It is not suppose to be carried out by the citizens, but by the law men.

Just like in matters of death, we are not suppose to kill the persons ourselves, the law is suppose to take care of that, for example.

The law should be carried out by the law, not the civilian, in other words.

 

[danial]

Salaam.

Brother Bluegazer, the law of an eye for an eye is just that, a law. It is not suppose to be carried out by the citizens, but by the law men.

Just like in matters of death, we are not suppose to kill the persons ourselves, the law is suppose to take care of that, for example.

The law should be carried out by the law, not the civilian, in other words.

I agree! People should not put the law into their own hands. Lashing back at others before even trying to forgive them and/or educate them on the right stuff is just childish.

 

[dna1987]

I support the effort Bluegazer is putting in. It's helped a lot and I appreciate it. These quotes from the bible can be used in self-defence from over aggressive Christians. I stopped one such person in their tracks this very week when they pulled out the "slay wherever you may find them" verse out on me.
The "law should be carried out by the law" statement doesn't make too much sense to me either, and I don't think it's applicable here.
Salam alaikum guys.

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum brothers Jibran and danial,


Firstly, would either one of you please point out to me where I have stated that we ordinary Muslims [i.e., not officials of the State] could apply the "eye for an eye" commandment of Allah in regards to matters of bodily injuries inflicted by one person on another?


If you believe that by starting this thread, I have actually implemented the "eye for an eye" commandment by myself [meaning that I have responded to the attacks of Geert Wilders while a Muslim State and its official agencies should only do that], then I must totally disagree. This forum [TurnToIslam] and many websites and forums defending Islam on the internet are the result of efforts of private Muslim individuals responding to the vulgar attacks to Islam haters in the West.


Sometimes this comes in the form of educating others. And at other times [like this thread] it comes in the form of quoting Biblical verses in context to be used against Islam haters who curse Islam and Muslims and hurl abuse against us. Is that a crime? If it is, please inform the moderators and it's within their powers to delete this thread. But I have one special request to the moderators. If you decide to delete this thread [and I sincerely hope you don't], then please inform me on a post on this thread about your intention, so that I could copy all the references posted by others and myself so that I could [on my own] use them in the defense of Islam.


As to brother danial writing that "Lashing back at others before even trying to forgive them and/or educate them on the right stuff is just childish", my response is that "childish" is believing that all non Muslims who hate Islam don't have the proper education regarding our religion, and once they know all about Islam, every thing's going to be alright and there'll be no more attacks on Islam from them.


Do you actually believe that?


If you do, then I'll have to inform you that you're just wrong. There are people who may come to know that Islam is the truth and yet still stay as non Muslims. Some may even go as far as attacking Islam.


And where does the responsibility lie in learning the true teachings of a religion? We Muslims are trying to get the message of Islam out there in the West, and these efforts are often hindered by the biased media and by the wrong practices of some Muslims. Still, that does not mean the Geert Wilders shouldn't have approached Muslims and asked us about our religion. He should have, and this is not his first time in attacking Islam.


The following is from the Radio Netherlands website [www.radionetherlands.nl]. It was posted on August 8, 2007:

'Qur'an should be banned' - Wilders strikes again

by Nicolien den Boer*

08-08-2007

The leader of the Netherlands' right-wing Freedom Party, Geert Wilders, has called for a ban on the sale and distribution of the Qur'an. He would also outlaw the book’s use in the mosque and at home. Mr Wilders says the Qur'an (Koran) is a fascist book which promotes violence and is similar to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.


In a letter-to-the-editor in today’s de Volkskrant newspaper, Wilders argues that the Qur'an should only be permitted for research at an academic level.

However, the MP - who is known for his controversial statements about Islam - says he knows his proposal doesn’t stand a chance of being approved by parliament. His Freedom Party has nine seats in the 150-seat Dutch lower house of parliament.


A warning

Geert Wilders says he wants his proposal to serve as a warning to radical Muslims who misuse the Qur'an to justify the use of violence. His statement comes in response to the recent attacks on Ehsan Jami, founder of the Committee for Former Muslims. He says the perpetrators use the Qur'an as an excuse for the attacks. Wilders writes that

“The book incites hatred and killing and therefore has no place in our legal order.”​

The jurist, commentator and co-member of the Committee for Former Muslims, Afshin Ellian also thinks that the Qur'an “possesses extremely violent passages with regard to women, Jews and non-believers”. However, he is against a ban. Mr Ellian says you should take measures against the people who abuse the Qur'an, not the book itself:

“It’s a religious book which of course can be read and discussed. What we really should fight are the radical imams and mosques which use the Qur'an to spread hatred. We must take firmer measures against them.”​

Hitler

Geert Wilders compares the Qur'an with Mein Kampf, which was written by Adolf Hitler in 1924. In his book, Hitler explained his theories about National Socialism, anti-Semitism and the superiority of the Aryan race.

The sale of Mein Kampf is outlawed in the Netherlands, but owning or trading old copies is permitted. However, Mr Wilders’ proposal to ban the Qur'an is more drastic than the ban on Mein Kampf because it would also outlaw the possession of the book.

Source: http://www.radionetherlands.nl/currentaffairs/ned070808mc


Notice the phrases:

Mr Wilders says the Qur'an (Koran) is a fascist book which promotes violence and is similar to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

Mr. Wilders' statement:

The book incites hatred and killing and therefore has no place in our legal order.

Leaving aside the fact he's quoting Qu'ranic texts out of context, what does Wilders have to say about the Bible? Do all the bloodbaths mentioned in the Bible have a place in the Netherlands' legal order? Do the names against non Jews [dogs and swine] have a place in the Netherlands' legal order? And if they don't, does he have the guts to call for a ban on the Bible? Does he have the guts to produce a film about these Biblical verses [mentioned in context]?


And how many times does Wilders have to attack Islam before we Muslims expose his hypocrisy? 1, 2, 3, 1000,.......... ?


Secondly, brother danial in his post #52 wrote the following:

i dont like this thread as an eye for and eye does not make the world a better place...

I believe it's very clear that you [brother danial] stated that "an eye for and eye does not make the world a better place". These are your own words. You did not write " I believe that taking the law of 'an eye for an eye' into our own hands does not make the world a better place". You specifically wrote that the principle itself [i.e., an eye for an eye] does not make the world a better place.


If you don't want me to misunderstand, then please clarify your intentions.


Regards,

Bluegazer

 

[Bluegazer]

To all brothers and sisters who have supported me, I thank you.

I also thank those who disagreed with me, because I feel your intentions are pure. I just -respectfully- do not agree with you.

 

[nizar83]

selemu aleikum,

thanx very much for posting.
some very enlightning facts i have read.

but is it just me, or are all these versions of the bilble just confusing and hard to read.
unlike the quraan, i get very confused and i seem to lose concentration whenever i read passages from the bible..while when i read the quraan, it feels good and it makes sense...its easy to remember..subhana allah

 

[Jibran]

Asalamaulaikum brother Bluegazer

I would like to apologize for my misconception earlier about your previous statement regarding "an eye for an eye"
You had a miscommunication with sister danial it appears, and i misread what the true meaning of your post was.

However, i think the better and more effective way to respond to Geert Wilders would be to point out his errors regarding islam.

For all the Qur'anic verses he used out of context, you can shed some light on them by giving muslims on this website the true meaning, so they can have a better understanding in case they come across a non-muslim with the same or similar views (this way we can respond to all non-muslims, not just christians).

I think we should directly refute Geert Wilders, because if we start attacking his religion, it will appear as we muslims are 'beating around the bush' and can't rebuttal his claims. It will also make us appear no different than them.

Geert Wilders is trying his best to tarnish the image of islam, and i think it would be best if we refrain from tarnishing the image of christianity in return, we should rather defend islam instead, and stay on the defensive.

Personally, i think after an active defensive of islam, christianity may be challenged. We can't respond to a challenge with another challenge, we have to defend first before we initiate a challenge. That's why it's important to have sound knowledge of Islam before we even begin taking such initiatives against others. I believe we should be on the defensive side first and foremost.

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum dear brother Jibran,


Your post #60 is as follows:

Asalamaulaikum brother Bluegazer

I would like to apologize for my misconception earlier about your previous statement regarding "an eye for an eye"
You had a miscommunication with sister danial it appears, and i misread what the true meaning of your post was.

However, i think the better and more effective way to respond to Geert Wilders would be to point out his errors regarding islam.

For all the Qur'anic verses he used out of context, you can shed some light on them by giving muslims on this website the true meaning, so they can have a better understanding in case they come across a non-muslim with the same or similar views (this way we can respond to all non-muslims, not just christians).

I think we should directly refute Geert Wilders, because if we start attacking his religion, it will appear as we muslims are 'beating around the bush' and can't rebuttal his claims. It will also make us appear no different than them.

Geert Wilders is trying his best to tarnish the image of islam, and i think it would be best if we refrain from tarnishing the image of christianity in return, we should rather defend islam instead, and stay on the defensive.

Personally, i think after an active defensive of islam, christianity may be challenged. We can't respond to a challenge with another challenge, we have to defend first before we initiate a challenge. That's why it's important to have sound knowledge of Islam before we even begin taking such initiatives against others. I believe we should be on the defensive side first and foremost.

I have several points to mention:


1- You wrote, "and i think it would be best if we refrain from tarnishing the image of christianity in return"


Dear brother, I have already shown you [in post #36 on this thread] that Allah the Almighty has condemned certain blasphemous beliefs of Judaism and Christianity in the Qur'an [for example, see 5:72-75, 3:181, and 5:64]. These blasphemous beliefs include the Trinity and attributing to God Almighty that which does not befit Him.


In other words, Allah the Almighty "attacked their religion". Allah the Almighty tarnished the image of the mainstream Christianity that is found today.


I don't believe that you'd suggest that we cut out these Qur'anic verses - which attack mainstream Jewish and Christian doctrines- before we give a translation of the meanings of the Qur'an to a Jew or Christian. Or would you?


What we Muslims must be careful about is that we do not lie, quote Biblical verses out of context, attack Biblical verses which contain Islamic commandments or use any other shady means in our propagation of Islam. We Muslims do not need to lie or use such deceitful tactics when we call others to Islam. And that, brother Jibran, is what makes us Muslims "different than them".


I had a debate with a Christian on another forum. Please click on the following link to read a post of mine addressed to him. In that post, I showed how Muslims could choose to [but generally did not] lie about certain Christian practices [unlike many Christians who have lied about certain Muslim practices], and I showed him the importance of not lying against another religion when debating with its adherents:

http://imanway.com/en/showpost.php?p=17268&postcount=18


2- You wrote that, "For all the Qur'anic verses he used out of context, you can shed some light on them by giving muslims on this website the true meaning, so they can have a better understanding in case they come across a non-muslim with the same or similar views (this way we can respond to all non-muslims, not just christians)."


You also wrote that you "think we should directly refute Geert Wilders, because if we start attacking his religion, it will appear as we muslims are 'beating around the bush' and can't rebuttal his claims."


And I say, that is an excellent idea. I have actually done just that when I responded to a blog that an inquiring Christian lady [Waterdrop] posted a link to. The link has been removed by the administration of TurnToIslam, but you can get a good idea about what was in that blog and the response others and myself have given. Please read the following thread. My posts are numbered 9 and 10:

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13122


I'm almost certain that most of the claims on the Wilders video have been already explained by knowledgeable Muslims. The problem is that Wilders himself does not know this Islamic explanation, or he does not care about it.


There's also another important factor to consider. Christians -for hundreds of years- have carried with them feelings of utter hatred towards Islam. These feelings were fed by their ignorance and Church propaganda. And even though the West has achieved -only recently when compared to other civilizations- high literacy rates and a high standard of education for its citizens, this deep hatred towards Islam still lingers in the Western mindset.


So, when Wilders produced such a film, everything he said will be automatically believed by the great majority of Westerners. Not many of them will research his claims objectively.


When a Muslim comes along and says something like, "Wilders was wrong in so and so", the Christian will reply, "I don't even want to listen to you. What could I possibly learn from followers of such a religion as Islam. I don't even want to waste my time having this debate with you."


What should the Muslim do in such a situation?


One way is to mention to him certain statements from the Roman Catholic Church that will stop him short. Please click on the following links to read threads containing my posts on this subject:

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19660
http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20320


Another way is to show him that he [i.e., the Christian] is using a double standard. By quoting -to the Christian- a Biblical verse such as "Fair Babylon, you destroyer, happy those who pay you back the evil you have done us! Happy those who seize your children and smash them against a rock." [Psalms 137:8-9], you will gain his attention and he will -for the first time- be willing to listen to your argument.


Of course, there's no 100% guarantee that these techniques will work, but if they don't, they'll still -most probably- make the aggressive Christian back off his verbal attacks against Muslims


--------------------------


I'd like to express to you, brother Jibran, a deep sense of respect. You wrote the following in post #51:

Brother Bluegazer, as regards to the verse in question, i agree with you, jazak allah for drawing this to my attention.

You also wrote the following in post #60:

I would like to apologize for my misconception earlier about your previous statement regarding "an eye for an eye"
You had a miscommunication with sister danial it appears, and i misread what the true meaning of your post was.

To be able to admit your mistakes is an excellent quality, and it requires courage. I thank you for such high conduct. I myself have made many mistakes, and if it weren't for the grace of Allah and after that [to a lesser degree] the advice of fellow Muslims, I wouldn't have learned from these mistakes.


Best regards,

Your brother in Islam,

Bluegazer