More anti-Islamic politicking...
G. Waleed Kavalec
"In light of September 11, 2001 events, we were told this was done by a few
evil men. This is correct. However, where did these men get the ideas for
such devastation and destruction? The answer is from the Qur'an and
Muhammad's teachings. They have been taught from childhood to hate
Christians and Jews. Our book will prove this point."
---by Bill Gray and Ron Smith
I wonder what would happen if 500,000 Muslims used the west's legal system
to individually file lawsuits against these two authors for libel and
slander?
Is this wishful thinking?
--
G. Waleed Kavalec
------------------- I send my heartfelt thanks to the authors of...
http://members.rogers.com/malikelshabazz/swf/thisisislam.swf
Any Mouse
> Excerpt from "Islam the Whole Truth":
> "In light of September 11, 2001 events, we were told
> this was done by a few evil men. This is correct.
> However, where did these men get the ideas for such
> devastation and destruction? The answer is from the
> Qur'an and Muhammad's teachings. They have been taught
> from childhood to hate Christians and Jews. Our book
> will prove this point."
> ---by Bill Gray and Ron Smith
>
> I wonder what would happen if 500,000 Muslims used the
> west's legal system to individually file lawsuits against
> these two authors for libel and slander?
Do you plan also to file such suits against your fellow
Muslims who use Qur'anic verses against Jews, Christians,
and non-believers? You don't have to look far to see this.
A frequent poster here uses as a tagline a verse from the
Qur'an that warns against Jews and Christians. Yes, I know
that YOU have a different understanding of all such verses.
And I am glad of that. What that shows is that the Qur'an,
like most religious scripture, admits wide interpretation.
Are not the authors of the above book allowed to interpret
and critize, just as you interpret and praise?
And why not file lawsuits against fellow Muslims who DO
teach their children to hate Jews and Christians? I suspect
this happens, just as, sadly, it happens the other way
around. Not universally. I expect -- I hope! -- most
Muslims teach their children respect for Jews and
Christians, just as most Christians teach their children
respect for Muslims and Jews. Sadly, that's not universal,
either. I suspect it is pretty easy to draw a line between
these more extreme teachings, and Al Queda. Just as it's
pretty easy to connect the teachings of Christian
fundamentalists to those who terrorize abortion clinics.
You don't have to go far to see this connection. There are
posters here in this newsgroup who exemplify it. Which
makes it pretty hard to prevail in your suit, at least in
the US, where truth is an absolute defense against slander
or libel. If you present your view to contrast with the
author's, they need only pull up the postings of Abdul
Aziz to demonstrate the other face of Islam.
This doesn't mean you're wrong. But I think you have
targetted the wrong enemy. The one thing that liberal
Christians have figured out is that their true enemy is
right-wing doctrine, and that they must meet it head on,
they must stand up and criticize it wherever it appears,
so that it never appears representative of Christianity.
It's an endless and thankless task, but they realize that
that is the only way to keep the world from thinking that
Christianity is equivalent to fundamentalism and Jerry
Falwell's teachings. It's no good going after the books
that criticize fundamentalism, because fundamentalism is
real, and it needs criticism. The important thing, to
the liberal Christian, is continually to show that
fundamentalism does not define Christianity, and to
educate their fellow Christians, so that fundamentalism
does not grow. You're facing the same problem. I wish
you luck!
Plainsman
> ---by Bill Gray and Ron Smith
>
> I wonder what would happen if 500,000 Muslims used the west's legal system
> to individually file lawsuits against these two authors for libel and
> slander?
>
Muslims rioted in the streets of eastern and western capitals demanding that
the authors be killed for daring to exercise their right to say this, nobody
anymore would even notice.
Andrew McNeil
>
> "In light of September 11, 2001 events, we were told this was done by a
few
> evil men. This is correct. However, where did these men get the ideas
for
> such devastation and destruction? The answer is from the Qur'an and
> Muhammad's teachings. They have been taught from childhood to hate
> Christians and Jews. Our book will prove this point."
> ---by Bill Gray and Ron Smith
>
> I wonder what would happen if 500,000 Muslims used the west's legal system
> to individually file lawsuits against these two authors for libel and
> slander?
>
> Is this wishful thinking?
> --
> G. Waleed Kavalec
I don't think you understand free speech in the US. You can say what you
want, even if it is insulting a silly. You are free to to criticize
Christianity too. In order to win a libel case you have to prove a
factual lie. The author of the above was stating an opinion.
BTW I do think that the terrorist got many ideas from the Koran. Certainly
not ALL Muslims are taught to hate others, but a significant number are.
See Pakistan's fundi Islamic Schools.
All Muslims? No. But some.
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
wrote:
snip
Grace and peace be upon all who read this:
>BTW I do think that the terrorist got many ideas from the Koran. Certainly
>not ALL Muslims are taught to hate others, but a significant number are.
>See Pakistan's fundi Islamic Schools.
And the same could be said about Christians and the Bible, or about
Hindu fundamentalist groups and their holy writings, etc, etc, etc.
There are always elements who, no matter what the faith, use their
belief to justify hatred of those who are not like them.
God will be the ultimate judge of their hatred.
jrw
(aisha)
kkabir
Sept. 11 terrorists got many ideas from? Think and feel is no substantiation
of a hunch.
FYI, The Quran does NOT teach violence, and I'm reasonably sure the Bible
does not teach that, either.
Don't the fundamentalist Christians swear by the Bible that the US Govt. is
their enemy, and that all non-white people in the USA( that includes all
Christians of color, too) should get out and go back(where?)? And that
implies they are learning and teaching systemic hatred, in their Christian
schools, of all people who are not white Christians!
I think you are mixing political agendas with religious faith and beliefs.
" Andrew McNeil" <agt...@inficad.com> wrote in message
news:a4om1t$c86$1...@samba.rahul.net...
Saqib Virk
> BTW I do think that the terrorist got many ideas from the Koran.
SV
Just like racist hate groups in the USA get their ideas from the Bible, right?
--
Saqib Virk
John Smith
news:<a54p7e$p1f$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
> FYI, The Quran does NOT teach violence, and I'm reasonably sure the
Bible
> does not teach that, either.
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.
(Quran 9:29)
You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and
hate your enemy.' [44] But I say to you, love your enemies and pray
for those who persecute you, [45] so that you may be sons of your
Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and
the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
(Matthew 5:43-45)
> Don't the fundamentalist Christians swear by the Bible that the US
Govt. is
> their enemy,
First of all, how do you define "fundamentalist"? I don't agree with
certain policies of the US government (e.g., abortion on demand), but
I don't consider it my enemy.
Then the Pharisees went and plotted together how they might trap Him
in what He said. [16] And they sent their disciples to Him, along with
the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are truthful and
teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not
partial to any. [17] Tell us then, what do You think? Is it lawful to
give a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?" [18] But Jesus perceived their
malice, and said, "Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites? [19] Show
Me the coin used for the poll-tax." And they brought Him a denarius.
[20] And He said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?"
[21] They said to Him, "Caesar's." Then He said to them, "Then render
to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are
God's."
(Matthew 22:15-21)
> and that all non-white people in the USA( that includes all
> Christians of color, too) should get out and go back(where?)?
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man,
there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
(Galatians 3:28)
> And that
> implies they are learning and teaching systemic hatred, in their
Christian
> schools, of all people who are not white Christians!
I think someone has been feeding you a line.
Regards,
John
thebit
> 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.
> (Quran 9:29)
Please start from Surah at-Taubah 9: 1. The entire context is aimed at the
spreading of Religion by a Messenger to his direct addresses. The Qur'an
does tell us that those who reject a Messenger are to be "brought low". If
the rejectors are polytheists, they will be punished by death in this
world. If the believers in the New Messenger can form an organised
collective, God will punish the rejectors through the hands of the
believers (and the war is also a means of testing the believers, some of
whom may be hypocrites). This is seen in the case of Muhammad (p) and
Moses (p). Moses (p) was ordered to kill the ones who worshipped the
golden calf. This was because they rejected a Messenger in their midst,
and had become polytheists.
If the believers cannot form an organised collective, then God, Himself,
will punish the rejectors. Examples from the Qur'an (and Bible) are seen
in the stories of Noah (p), Lot (p) and Salih (p).
If, however, the rejectors are non-polytheists, e.g. Jews and Christians
("People of the Book"), then they are made politically subservient to the
believers. This is also seen from history, where rejectors of Jesus (p)
were eventually "brought low", and Christianity became the State religion.
This is also seen from the history after Muhamad (p): the Christian
Empires did crumble before the wave of Islam. Jews and Christians were
made to pay Jizyah as a punishment from God.
It is easy to quote out of context to prove ones "position".
> You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and
> hate your enemy.' [44] But I say to you, love your enemies and pray
> for those who persecute you, [45] so that you may be sons of your
> Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and
> the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
> (Matthew 5:43-45)
And in the same gospel we see:
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not
come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have
come to turn " 'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a
daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law" (Matthew 10: 34).
Jesus (p) also accepted the previous law. The Old Testament tells us for
killing by previous Prophets. Shall we draw conclusions about these the
same way as you have done? No. I think we'll be a little more intelligent
and try and see the bigger picture.
But the Qur'an also says:
"O ye who believe! When ye go forth (to fight) in the way of Allah, be
careful to discriminate, and say not unto
one who offereth you peace: "Thou art not a believer," seeking the chance
profits of this life (so that ye may despoil
him)." 4: 94
"There is no good in much of their secret conferences save (in) him who
enjoineth almsgiving and kindness and
peace-making among the people. Whoso doeth that, seeking the good pleasure
of Allah, We shall bestow on him a
vast reward." 4: 114
"And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in
Allah. Lo! He, even He, is the Hearer, the
Knower." 8: 61
"The (faithful) slaves of the Beneficent are they who walk upon the earth
modestly, and when the foolish ones
address them answer: peace;" 25: 63
Why did you not quote these?
vmi...@yahoo.com
> 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.
> (Quran 9:29)
This has never, at any time, been understood by muslims as a blanket
command to fight and kill all non-muslims. If so, they would have
carried out the command throughout history.
Has it occured to you why a muslim doesn not just get up and attack his
non-muslim neighbors? You may think that this is an adjustment on the
part of muslims, in the same way that Christians and Jews have learnt
to "reform" their faith over centuries. But I can assure you that it
is not so. I was never taught that I had a duty, per Qur'an 9:29 to
wreak violence on non-muslims. Could you cite historical evidence from
*any* period in Islamic history when it was so taught or practiced?
This is, of course, not the first time that such quotes from the Qur'an
are cited as proof of violence of Islam and muslims. Obviously, the
meaning is not what you project it to be. Why do you, then, keep on
raising these strawman?
Viqar Ahmed
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service
MENJ
> BTW I do think that the terrorist got many ideas from the Koran. Certainly
> not ALL Muslims are taught to hate others, but a significant number are.
Have you read the book of Joshua Chaper 6 lately? Do it. Perhaps those
Christian terrorists (the IRA and ETA comes to mind) get their ideas
from there?
Any Mouse
> The Qur'an does tell us that those who reject a Messenger are
> to be "brought low". If the rejectors are polytheists, they
> will be punished by death in this world. If the believers in
> the New Messenger can form an organised collective, God will
> punish the rejectors through the hands of the believers
This echoes exactly what the critics of Islam say: that Muslims
believe they have a god-given right to conquer people who
reject Islam.
> If, however, the rejectors are non-polytheists, e.g. Jews and
> Christians ("People of the Book"), then they are made
> politically subservient to the believers.
And that Muslims, where they have the chance, will make Jews
and Christians second-class citizens. Tell me how I misinterpret?
Because frankly, your explanation parrots exactly what the
Cassandras in the west say, and amply justifies the hardliners.
> This is also seen from history, where rejectors of Jesus (p)
> were eventually "brought low", and Christianity became the
> State religion.
Jesus never called for Christianity to become a state religion.
That was Constantinople's decision. Most Christians in the west
believe in separating church from state, and view the
installment of Christianity as state religion as a historical
role the church once played, but not as a mandate for what it
must or should be.
> Moses (p) was ordered to kill the ones who worshipped the
> golden calf. This was because they rejected a Messenger
> in their midst, and had become polytheists.
The Old Testament gives a pretty barbaric view of religion.
Most Jews and Christians no longer believe that their god
orders genocide.
thebit
> This echoes exactly what the critics of Islam say: that Muslims
> believe they have a god-given right to conquer people who
> reject Islam.
No. You have missed the point completely. Muslims today cannot wage war to spread Religion.
This is the sole right of a Messenger, and anyone God makes "witnesses unto mankind". Moses
and Muhammad (pbut) are examples of Messengers who were given the Law of Jihad. The
Companions (ra) of the Prophet (p) are included in latter category. There is no "God-given"
right for any Muslim to conquer another people.
> And that Muslims, where they have the chance, will make Jews
> and Christians second-class citizens.
I really think you should read the entire post before making comments. You have done this
on the "stoning" thread too.
The Jizyah was a punishment on the People of the Book, who rejected either the Messenger
(Muhammad (p)) or his Companions.
Since neither me, nor any other Muslim, are a Messenger of God, through whom Signs have
been revealed of which there is no denial, nor are we (meaning the Muslims today) a people
whom God has made "witnesses unto mankind", then we cannot say for sure who is rejecting
the Message out of total arrogance, be he Jew, Christian or anyone.
> Tell me how I misinterpret?
You misinterpret by applying verses from the Qur'an, specific to a people, to an entire
population.
> Jesus never called for Christianity to become a state religion.
I know he didn't. He couldn't, because he was unable to establish an organised following.
He too was a Messenger from God, and he too brought with him Signs which rendered those who
turned away from him as "witnesses unto their own rejection". In other words, the
Israelites who rejected him, were now to be punished by God Himself. They wre therefore
made subservient to the believers of the new Messenger. Christianity did, eventually,
become the "accepted" religion.
> > Moses (p) was ordered to kill the ones who worshipped the
> > golden calf. This was because they rejected a Messenger
> > in their midst, and had become polytheists.
>
> The Old Testament gives a pretty barbaric view of religion.
> Most Jews and Christians no longer believe that their god
> orders genocide.
God does not order "genocide". No one, Muslim included, believes so. You have failed to
understand the Law pertaining to a Messenger. Read the following links for clarification:
http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/questions.jsp?point=3&id=42
http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/questions.jsp?point=3&id=219
G. Waleed Kavalec
>
> > 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.
> > (Quran 9:29)
>
> Please start from Surah at-Taubah 9: 1. The entire context is aimed at the
> spreading of Religion by a Messenger to his direct addresses. The Qur'an
> does tell us that those who reject a Messenger are to be "brought low". If
> the rejectors are polytheists, they will be punished by death in this
> world. If the believers in the New Messenger can form an organised
> collective, God will punish the rejectors through the hands of the
> believers (and the war is also a means of testing the believers, some of
> whom may be hypocrites). This is seen in the case of Muhammad (p) and
> Moses (p). Moses (p) was ordered to kill the ones who worshipped the
> golden calf. This was because they rejected a Messenger in their midst,
> and had become polytheists.
073.010
Waisbir AAala ma yaqooloona waohjurhum hajran jameelan
YUSUFALI: And have patience with what they say, and leave them with noble
(dignity).
PICKTHAL: And bear with patience what they utter, and part from them with a
fair leave-taking.
SHAKIR: And bear patiently what they say and avoid them with a becoming
avoidance.
KHALIFA: And remain steadfast in the face of their utterances, and disregard
them in a nice manner.
073.011
Watharnee waalmukaththibeena olee alnnaAAmati wamahhilhum qaleelan
YUSUFALI: And leave Me (alone to deal with) those in possession of the good
things of life, who (yet) deny the Truth; and bear with them for a little
while.
PICKTHAL: Leave Me to deal with the deniers, lords of ease and comfort (in
this life); and do thou respite them awhile.
SHAKIR: And leave Me and the rejecters, the possessors of ease and plenty,
and respite them a little.
KHALIFA: And let Me deal with the rejectors, who have been generously
blessed; just give them a little time.
073.012
Inna ladayna ankalan wajaheeman
YUSUFALI: With Us are Fetters (to bind them), and a Fire (to burn them),
PICKTHAL: Lo! with Us are heavy fetters and a raging fire,
SHAKIR: Surely with Us are heavy fetters and a flaming fire,
KHALIFA: We have severe punishments, and Hell.
073.013
WataAAaman tha ghussatin waAAathaban aleeman
YUSUFALI: And a Food that chokes, and a Penalty Grievous.
PICKTHAL: And food which choketh (the partaker), and a painful doom
SHAKIR: And food that chokes and a painful punishment,
KHALIFA: Food that can hardly be swallowed, and painful retribution.
>
>
> Why did you not quote these?
>
Same question.
--
G. Waleed Kavalec
-------------------
Do not act in response to how you wish the world was.
Act in response to how the world is.
thebit
"G. Waleed Kavalec" wrote:
> > Why did you not quote these?
>
> Same question.
>
The Divine Law regarding a Messenger is not very well understood or known among
Muslims. Most Muslims seem to think it is their God-given right to launch Jihad
to spread Religion and bring other countries under the political control of
"Islam". However, it is clear from theQur'an, that God has granted the
Messengers ascendency in the land to which they are sent, and that those who
oppose a Messenger ("Rasool") will be "brought low" (Surah 58: 20). This can,
for obvious reasons, not apply to the ordinary Muslim.
The appearence of a Messenger is a sign of God's Final Justice upon those to
whom the Messenger has come. God warns the people to look at those before them
who rejected a Messenger, and see their fate at doing so (30: 47). The rejection
of a Messenger, unlike a Prophet ("Nabi") is met with a punishment in this
world, as well as what God decides for them in the next. They (the Rejectors)
have rendered themselves "witnesses unto their own rejection" (9: 17). The
Messenger, we are told in the Qur'an, delivers the Messege to such an extent
that the people have no excuse to reject it (72: 28).
God grants the Rejectors immunity whilst the Messenger is among them (8: 32-33).
However, once the persecution of a Messenger begins, God directs the Messenger
to migrate. This is now the end of imunity granted to the people of the
Messenger (17: 76). God directs the Messenger when he is to migrate (68: 48).
The migration is a sign the God's Final Justice is to be served. All Messengers
have migrated before the punishment is given to the Rejectors. In fact God tells
us this in 48: 32.
Now the punishment will be delivered in one of two ways. If the Messenger and
his followers cannot form an organised collective God will send down a natural
disaster upon the rejectors. We see this from the fate of the the people of Noah
and Salih (pbut) and Pharoah, upon his rejection of Moses (p). This is a warning
given to the Arabs in Qur'an 73: 15-18. See also 54: 43-45.
However, the Messenger and his followers were able to form a "State" in Medinah.
The punishment is now to be given through the hands of the Believers (9: 14).
God repeadetly warns the Rejectors that they will be subject to retribution for
the Rejection of a Messenger (see 48: 22-23 and 61: 8-9).
The order to fight the Polytheists is given in 8: 39. See also the opening
verses of Surah 9.
War was also a form of a test of cleansing the Commuity of hypocrites. God says
that he would grant the Believers victory, but warned those hypocrites that they
would be punished if they did not fight (see 3: 179 and 9: 39-40).
Qur'an 73: 10 tells the Messenger to comtinue preaching and not to be riled by
their insults Qur'an 73: 11 tells the Messenger that God, Himself, will deal
with the Rejectors. The order to fight the polytheists, in fact, the punishment
on the Polytheists of rejecting a Messenger. It was not driven by the Messenger
or his Companions, like some Muslims claim. It was under the direct supervision
of God and His Sunnah: There is no change in His Divine Law (48: 23). Please
look at the histories of Moses and Jesus (pbut).
John Smith
> The Jizyah was a punishment on the People of the Book, who rejected either the Messenger
> (Muhammad (p)) or his Companions.
So Quran 9:29 was supposed to become inapplicable when Muhammad and
his Companions died? It didn't work out that way in reality:
"The Zoroastrians who remained in Persia (modern Iran) after the
Arab–Muslim conquest (7th century AD) had a long history as outcasts.
Although they purchased some toleration by paying the jizya (poll
tax), not abolished until 1882, they were treated as an inferior race,
had to wear distinctive garb, and were not allowed to ride horses or
bear arms."
(Encyclopedia Britannica)
So it seems Quran 9:29 was alive and well in Persia until the late
19th century. Quran 9:29 seems to be alive and well in Egypt and
Sudan today. (I refer to the widely reported persecution of
Christians in those countries.)
"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."
(Quran 9:29)
Regards,
John
Saqib Virk
news:a7hbfg$i0v$1...@samba.rahul.net...
>
> So Quran 9:29 was supposed to become inapplicable when
> Muhammad and his Companions died?
>
> "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."
> (Quran 9:29)
SV
Permission to fight is given to the victims of aggression. God is able to
help the victims, those who have been driven from their homes because of
their beliefs. The cruel are repelled with the help of the righteous to
establish freedom of faith and worship. Islam allows fighting when a people
have suffered from aggression, when the aggressor has no cause for
aggression and he seeks to interfere with the religion of his victim. If an
enemy attacks, the Muslims are free to reply but if the enemy desists the
Muslims must also desist. Fighting will last as long as religious
persecution lasts and freedom is not established. With this in mind we
should read 9:29 in context. The verse refers to a period of time when the
Muslims had gained the upper hand over their persecutors. The persecutors
were given a 4 month period to see for themselves that their plans had been
frustrated and Islam was now dominant. The Quran, in 9:29, does not refer to
a war against any or every sort of disbeliever without discrimination, but
refers only to those who persecuted and attempted to destroy the Muslim
community and continued to do so, those that were avowed enemies of Islam,
had began hostilities, broken their oaths and plotted to expel the Prophet.
These people were granted respite for four months to travel the land in
safety to see whether or not Islam had triumphed and whether the word of God
was true. At the end of this period war was to be resumed against them,
except of course those with whom there were treaties.
"And if they break their oaths after their covenant, and attack your
religion, then fight these leaders of disbelief - surely, they have no
regard for their oaths, - that they may desist. Will you not fight a people
who have broken their oaths, and who plotted to turn out the Messenger, and
they were the first to commence hostilities against you? Do you fear them?
Nay, God is most worthy that you should fear HIM, if you are believers."
[Quran 9:12-13]
--
Peace,
Saqib Virk
thebit
> thebit <thebi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<a69h2q$f1m$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
> > The Jizyah was a punishment on the People of the Book, who rejected either the Messenger
> > (Muhammad (p)) or his Companions.
>
> So Quran 9:29 was supposed to become inapplicable when Muhammad and
> his Companions died? It didn't work out that way in reality:
I cannot answer for other Muslims or their understanding. I have drawn mine from scholars as
well. It is, thereafter, up to an individual to see which seems more compatible and more
correct. Certain opinions seem to narrow down the Revelation; certain ones see the wholeness
of Religion and take the entire meaning in the context, both textually and historically. Take
your pick.
God has clearly made the advent of a Messenger a sign of His Final Justice to the people who
receive the Messenger. A rejection of the Messenger entails a punishement: death for
polytheists and a "political" punishment for the believers in the One God. Please look up the
lives and histories of Moses and Jesus (pbut).
> (I refer to the widely reported persecution of
> Christians in those countries.)
Refer it to those Muslims who defend the treatment of Christians in Sudan and Egypt. I
personally do not find such actions to be "Islamic".
<snipped verse quoted out of context>
It seems that whatever explanation is given you are not interested. Why are you here?