Read Qur'an first and don't rely on Christian aplogists, they are deceiving you.

Submitted by Shaji (United Arab Emirates), Apr 26, 2009 at 03:23

Thanks for your reply. I am in the midst of many responses; I hardly find time for clarification. I am amazed with the intensity of criticism against Islam. I am also sad the so-called Muslims in deep sleep and always behind fun and unaware about their responsibilities.

Nice to know you are not among the slandering propagandist.

You claim the existence of Triune God. Islam does not agree with this and Qur'an clarifies this in 4:171 - O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of ALLAH aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of ALLAH, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in ALLAH and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for ALLAH is one ALLAH. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is ALLAH as a Disposer of affairs".

I too agree Jesus (peace be upon him) preached peace in his mission. In Islam, not only Jesus (peace be upon him) all the Prophets (peace be upon them all) did the same. Muslims make no distinction between them. Just think how beautiful then Islam is…..It is not a religion came to existence because of one man or his name or his sect. It is essentially means peace and submitting the will to One and Only Almighty God.

The nine-flavored fruit which you said seems not entered to most Christians of past and even today. In their daily life, where they follow Christianity….??. Also who is following Jesus (peace be upon him) in words and deeds, Muslims or Christians….??.

Let us see one by one.

1. Islam says making partners to God (shirk) is the biggest sin.
Al-Qur'an 4:48
Al-Qur'an 4:116
Exodus 20:2-5
Deuteronomy 5:7-9

But Christians believe in triune God whereas Muslims believe in One and Only God.

2. Jesus (peace be upon him) not God. He never claimed Divinity.
Al-Qur'an 5:72
John 14:28
John 10:29
Mathew 12:28
Luke 11:20
John 5:30
Acts 2:21

3. Ablution before praying.

Al-Qur'an 5:6
Exodus 40:31-32
Acts 21:26

4. Abstaining from alcohol
Al-Qur'an 5:90
Proverbs 20:1
Ephesians 5:18

5. Pork is prohibited
Leviticus 11:7-8
Deuteronomy 14:8
Isaiah 65:2-5

6. Food on which names beside Allah have been invoked
Acts 15:29; Revelation 2:14

7. Six Criteria for Hijab in Islam
Deuteronomy 22:5
1 Timothy 2:9 e.g. of Mary
1 Corinthians 11:5-6

8. Circumcision
Acts 7:8
John 7:22
Luke 2:21

In short, every Muslim should follow all the Commandments of Allah and His Messenger Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and abstain from the things they have prohibited.

If Christian is a person who follows the teachings of Christ (peace be upon him) and not one who worships Christ (peace be upon him). Then we are more Christian than the Christians themselves.

Muslim is a person who submits his will to Allah. Jesus (peace be upon him) said, "not my will but thy will be done." i.e. Muslim. (John 5:30)

You quoted a Hadith from Sahih Muslim, "I have been commanded to fight until they testify there is no god but Allah and I am his messenger." – And provided as proof that violence is embedded in Islam.

I already explained about this verse earlier. Similar verse is found in Qur'an 2:193. Actually this was the instruction to stop religious persecution followed by the constitutional monarchies. This is misinterpreted as the rebellion against disbelievers. See the reply to Allegation no. 3 in my first posting.

Again you as usual refer to answering-islam sites. You forget to see its reply from answering-christianity site. Refer both and do a comparative study before premature conclusions.

When you talk about Hitler, I didn't say he was ardent follower of Christianity. Read my words properly before you respond. I said……"no point in judging a butcher's action in terms of his religion. It depends on how the person understood and followed that religion". But you quoted Osama Bin Laden referring to a Hadith passage describing al-jannah for shahids. Here you failed to realize who is Osama bin Laden and his authority in Islam. Remember, if you want to misinterpret, you can do with any religious texts. If you analyze Qur'an and authentic Hadith with proper context and try to know what it actually meant, such misinterpretations could have avoided.

Answer from islamqa for Q. No. 5441 is another attempt of misinterpretation. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) came from Quraish in Makkah. He was the most accepted man in Makkah for his truthfulness and character. When God asked him to deliver the message of Islam to polytheists, he started preaching. But they turned against him; initially they advised him to restrain; then they offered him wealth and facilities and finally threatened and did everything to kill him. His followers were brutally tortured. Did you ever seriously think about that situation….??. What mistake Prophet (peace be upon him) did…??. He called his people (the primary audience) to worship One and Only God. He never asked them any favor for his personal benefit. Still they were deadly against him. He suffered this for 13 years without a single retaliation. I am not attempting to mention here intensity of their suffering. His followers many times urged him to fight back. He replied them he did not get instruction from God to do that. Those who believed, asked Prophet (peace be upon him) when they get help from God…??....Prophet (peace be upon him) asked them to be calm and patient….and this continued for 13 years until God instructed them flee to Medina. In between Prophet went (peace be upon him) to Taif to his relatives to escape from severe torture. But they stoned him and ousted from there also. Again what was the mistake he did….??. He invited people to worship One and Only God….Was that a big mistake…..??.

In Medina, people welcomed them and majority among them accepted Islam without any force. There was no fighting happened there…..Were they accepted due to fear from sword…..??. When majority became Muslims there, an Islamic government came into existence there and Prophet (peace be upon him) became the ruler. You know what he did first….??. Jews were a prominent community there, he established a treaty with them allowing them to practice their religion as per they believe but they should co-operate with Muslims against external aggression. If Prophet (peace be upon him) wanted to convert them by sword, why he entered into a treaty and proclaim them that they could live as per their religion…??.

I just outlined the above incidents for you to aware the actual situation and not to be a victim of Islam haters. Islamqa says those who understood Islam readily accepted it. Those who were stubborn resisted initially not to win ideologically but in fear of loosing their power and dominance in Arabia. Later on they had to surrender. As their resistance was with sword, Islam had to equally retaliate. I don't understand where the problem here is. This can better understood in the light of Qur'anic verse 2:190 - "Fight in the cause of ALLAH those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for ALLAH loveth not transgressors". It is clear from Qur'an that instruction to fight is to those come for fight and not to disturb a peaceful society. This is very well explained in verse 60:8 - "ALLAH forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for ALLAH loves those who are just."

Why you don't look at Qur'an before you allege "Islam spread by sword"…..??. If anybody follows their vain desires other than Qur'an and Prophet's (peace be upon him) teachings, how that is accountable as proof in Islam….??.

Of course, jihad with sword is prescribed in Islam. But in what circumstance….??. From Prophet's (peace be upon him) life and his approach, one could deduct the following, when jihad with sword to be done. I already explained this earlier. I again repeat…...

1. It must be confirmed that Muslims in particular region are severely oppressed and they are not allowed to practice their religion or to do Da'wa (Islamic propagation by peaceful means) activities.

2. If Muslims are facing problems in one region, does not give permission to retaliate in other parts of the world, which have no involvement in persecuting Muslims. There is no proof in Islam for such acts.

3. Any retaliation must be done under a leadership appointed by Islamic government. Individual retaliation or revenge is not allowed unless through the court of law. The action must not be intended against innocent people, women, children or old age. Only it is done against those come to fight and exterminate Muslims.

So the fatwa of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in Majmoo' al-Fataawa, 28/263 to be read in the light of above situations. But critics of Islam misuse and apply fatwa in the wrong context.

Then you quoted 2 Qur'anic verses – 57:25 and 27:25

Let us analyze both.

57:25 – "We sent aforetime our apostles with Clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in justice; and We sent down Iron, in which is (material for) mighty war, as well as many benefits for mankind, that Allah may test who it is that will help, Unseen, Him and His apostles: For Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might (and able to enforce His Will)".

From the above verse, you said - So whoever deviates from the Book is to be brought back with iron, i.e. by force. If you have truly read the above verse, where it is mentioned "whoever deviates from the book is to be brought back with iron, i.e., by force"……??. Why you spread lies……??. I am sorry to ask you this. You are saying something which is not in that verse. Will you admit it was a mistake….??.

I understood you have not even read Qur'an. You simply take the quotes of other christian apologists and use it blindly.

And 27:25 - "(Kept them away from the Path), that they should not worship Allah, Who brings to light what is hidden in the heavens and the earth, and knows what ye hide and what ye reveal.

Once again, where in the above verse to use force to bring back the deviates…..??. I hope you and readers would take a note of this usual and clear case of deception by christian apologists.

Then you quoted – "It was narrated that Jaabir ibn 'Abd-Allaah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded us to strike with this, meaning the sword, whoever turns away from this, meaning the Qur'aan".

You haven't said it is from which Hadith book and the reference. Also I am sure the meaning of "this" is given by you. You tried to give own meaning and not the text that says. You are crossing all the limits in order to find proof for your claims. Unfortunately you blindly follow others claim without at least once reading to Islamic authentic texts.

You quoted another 2 verses from Qur'an, 22:40 and 2:251

Let us see one by one.

22:40 says – "They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is Allah.. Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will)."

The verse clearly speaking about the oppressors of demolishing not only mosques but also other religious homes. There is no sword mentioned in the above verse. But see what you said referring to this verse - The evidence clearly indicates that the sword is one of the most important means that led to the spread of Islam [quotes Q. 22:40; 2:251]

Now take 2:251 – "By Allah's will they routed them; and David slew Goliath; and Allah gave him power and wisdom and taught him whatever (else) He willed. And did not Allah Check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief: But Allah is full of bounty to all the worlds".

How you can prove from above verse "Islam spread by sword". It basically speaking about stopping mischief in the world. How that becomes proof for Islam spread by sword….??. The verse actually reiterates the need of powerful law enforcement system for a country.

Then you quoted Qur'an 8:60 which says – "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly".

It actually referring Muslims to be equipped with military resources and should have a standing army in a state of preparedness, in order that it may be used when needed. Never should it happen that the Muslims are caught unawares and have to hurriedly look around right and left to build up their defenses and collect arms and supplies in order to meet the challenge of the enemy. For then it might be too late and the enemy might have accomplished its purpose.

Then you asked, what would the kuffaar have to be afraid of? Of mere words spoken on the tongue?

Kuffar have to be afraid of, because those kuffaar (In Makkah) were consistently preparing and engaged in war to exterminate Muslims. Best example is torturing Muslims in Makkah and conspired to kill Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions there. Muslims flee to Medina to escape from this torture. Even in Medina Muslims were not let free. The same Kuffaar went to Medina to extirpate growing Muslim population there. Weren't then Muslims having the right to resist….??. How they would have prevented the attacks…??. Were they had to still face the oppression?. If they had to fight back, under the leadership of Prophet (peace be upon him) after forming an Islamic government in Medina, wouldn't they have to scare Kuffaar….??. A war is always met with frightening the opponent. Why it is not applicable in case of Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions?. Islam never said one should have to speak with only tongue at any stage. I already mentioned several times to you. Qital is part of Jihad and it's allowed in Islam on certain instances and those situations I already explained. How it could be wrong….??. If it is wrong, why each country keeps strong military force in modern world….??. They could have solved everything with tongue….isn't it?. Be practical when you allege….Islam is a practical religion and not it is something which remains only in texts and without practical validation. The Hadith you quoted from al-Saheehayn also must be understood in the light of above context. I have been repeating this, because when you remove the context, altogether the meaning change. This is how Islam is being misrepresented….

You said - So this call to Islam was accompanied by the force of arms…So the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told his commanders to call the kuffaar to Islam whilst wielding their swords over their heads. If they refused to become Muslim then they should pay the jizyah with humility. If they refused then there was nothing left for them but the sword – "If they refuse then seek the help of Allaah and fight them"

If the call of Islam accompanied by force, why Qur'an says in 109:1-6 – "Say: O ye that reject Faith!, I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship, And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship, To you be your Way, and to me mine".

Once again read the last line, "To you be your Way, and to me mine". Also in 2:256 – 'Let there be no compulsion in religion….". Also what was the need of Prophet (peace be upon him) entered in treaty with people of other faiths in Medina…??. If sword wielded over their heads, what was the need of a treaty…??.

I will repeat my earlier comment regarding jizyah here. Because you are not reading that and again allege the same.

"Jizya" is derived from the root "Jaza" or "compensate". Islam was not the first religion to pre-ordain the Jizya and Muslims were not the first nation to levy the Jizya unto the peoples subdued by them.

Victorious nations throughout history have persisted in levying the Jizya on their conquered subjects. In Bible, Matthew 17:24-25 says - "What do you think Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes – from their own sons or from others?" "From others" Peter answered. "Then the sons are exempt" Jesus said to him."

When the Prophets (peace be upon them), conquered certain kingdoms with the will and victory of Allah, they levied the jizya upon the conquered peoples. They had in fact also enslaved the conquered peoples as was done by Joshua on the people of Canaan when he conquered them:

"They did not dislodge the Canaanites dwelling on Gezer ; to this day the Canaanites live among the people of Ephraim but are required to pay Jizya." (Joshua 16:10).

Islam did not halt the societal norms and human practices which precedes its advent. Rather, Islam sets a higher standard above the misgivings of others. Holy Qur'aan 60:8 says - "Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loves those who are just."

The Prophet (peace be upon him) also says warning against being unjust to the People of Dhimma or impairing their rights: "The one who wrongs a covenanter or impairs his right or overworks him or forcibly takes something from him, I will be his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment" Narrated by Abu Dawood (3052) in (170/3).

Thomas Arnold in his The Preaching of Islam said: "The purpose of levying this tax on Christians – as reiterated by some researchers – was not a form of punishment for not accepting Islam. They rather used to pay it with the remaining dhimmis namely non-Muslims subjects of the Islamic state whose beliefs prevent them from joining the military service in return for the protection secured to them by Muslims' swords."

You quoted - Al Bukhari (4557) and interpretation of the meaning of verse 3:110 said, "You are the best (i.e., the most beneficial) of people for mankind, you bring them in the chains that are around their necks until they enter Islam." Can people be brought in chains except in the case of jihad??

The verse 3:110 actually says – "Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors".

Actually "bring them in chains around their neck until they enter Islam" is a metaphorical presentation. It could be better understood from verse 7:157 which says - "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper."

Essentially the verses mean, Prophet (peace be upon him) leading those people who were under Jahiliyya (darkness) towards light and true path.

If you still want to misinterpret, then read following verses from Bible and see how Bible deals women and innocent children.

1 Samuel 15:2-4 says – "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt, 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. And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.

Let us look at Numbers 31:17 - "Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."

Also, let us look at Numbers 31:35-40 - "[From the captives of war] 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.......of which the tribute for the LORD was 32 [virgin women]."

Why kill the innocent children? Why kill all of the non-virgin women? Back then, it was only men who fought men in wars. Women rarely fought in battle fields. So what crime did the innocent children and the non-virgin women do?.

In the NT Luke 22:36, we read about Jesus commanding his followers to buy swords: "He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

We also read about Jesus bringing corruption and destruction to earth rather than peace: "Do not suppose that I [Jesus] have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34)"

Jesus ordering the killing of apostates (those who desert him): "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away an withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. " (John 15:5-6)

Christian apologists who allege Qur'an instructing violence never see what their own Bible says.

You quoted - Al-Jihad (Islamic Holy War) in Allah's Cause [with a large number of Muslims (union), equipped with the latest modern weapons)], is placed at the top in Islam, and is one of its pillars. Islam CANNOT be established EXCEPT with Jihad and with it is made high (superior) the Word of Allah (La ilaha il Allah – None has the right to be worshiped but Allah, Islam, etc.), and with it – Jihad, is propagated Allah's Religion (Islam). And by abandoning it – Jihad, [And we seek refuge with Allah from it], there is the DESTRUCTION of Islam and its people (Muslims), with the loss of honour and their country and a severe decline in their rule and kingdom. Jihad is prescribed (as an obligatory duty to Allah), on every Muslim, and he who does not fight in Allah's Cause and does not (even) speak to his personal-self for fighting in Allah's Cause, then he will die (as a hypocrite), while committing one of crime [sic], items of hypocrisy. (Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud Din Al-Hilali & Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur'an: With Comments from Tafsir At-Tabari, Tafsir Al-Qurtubi and Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Ahadith from Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and other Ahadith Books [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Lahore, Houston, New York, First Edition: January 2000], Part 2. From Surah 6 to 9, Q. 9:24, fn. 1, p. 338; capital and underline emphasis ours)

Again:

Al-Jihad (Holy fighting) in Allah's Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). BY JIHAD ISLAM IS ESTABLISHED, ALLAH'S WORD IS MADE SUPERIOR, (His Word – La ilaha illallah – none has the right to be worshiped but Allah), AND HIS RELIGION ISLAM IS PROPAGATED. By ABANDONING Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam IS DESTROYED and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanishes. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite. (Ibid., Q. 9:44, fn. 1, p. 383; capital emphasis ours)

I don't understand what is wrong in the above explanation. If you have properly followed our discussion you would find nothing wrong about Jihad in Islam.

Let us analyze your quote - It is mentioned from Ibn 'Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, "My provision has been placed under the shadow of my spear, and abasement and humility have been placed on the one who disobeys my command." (Bewley, Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari, Chapter 61. Book of Jihad and Military Expeditions;)

Once again what is wrong here…??.

Read Bible, Ezekiel 9:5-7 - "Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told."

Is your quote from Sahih Bukhari more dangerous than Ezekiel 9:5-7…..??.

Actually Hadith from Sahih Bukhari is reiterating the essentials of obeying the Prophet (peace be upon him) in all walks of life to be a Muslim. You must note that, Non-Muslims were allowed to live as per their religion under Prophet's (peace be upon him) rule.

You continued – "In saying "Even if Muslims had it they could not use it to spread Islam because the Qur'an says in 2:256 – 'Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error'. So Qur'an says no compulsion in religion,you quote a Surah which, with all the other 'nice-sounding' tolerant Qur'anic verses has been abrogated by "sword verses," revealed later in Muhammad's career, the changing commands regarding the use of violence against non-Muslims being certainly the most threatening for non-Muslims."

First of all, there is no abrogation of verses replacing "tolerant verses" with "sword verses". I told you, when Islamic government formed under Prophet (peace be upon him), being ruler it was then Prophet's (peace be upon him) duty to resist against the aggression towards his country. Then all the wars happened. This is what occurred in Prophet's (peace be upon him) career. Earlier there was no instruction from God to fight, as it must be done only under the leadership of a ruler. It was not all threatening to non-Muslims, in fact, their rights were protected and they were allowed to practice their faith as per their texts. This you will find in the treaties of Aqaba and Hudaibiya. Some of that, I already explained. It seems you are not properly reading it.

Then you mentioned about abrogation (Qur'an 2:106 and 13:39). Coming to the issue of abrogation, we need to understand one focal point, which is that Allah Almighty's knowledge covers everything. It is not subject to change because it is not limited by the boundaries of time. This means that when Allah Almighty reveals something in the Qur'an and later on gives a fresh command that adjusts the old one or cancels it, He surely knows already that He is going to reveal something to adjust the old command or cancel it. In other words, the new command is not new to Him; it is new to us because we have no access to His knowledge and we are bound by time limitations.

As you are a Christian believer, I would like to show you abrogation in Bible.

1) Numbers 19:23 says - "God is not a man, that he should lie ; neither the son of man that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

However, the Bible itself claims that God repents. Consider the following passages, Genesis 6:6-7 - "And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them."

2) Jesus (peace be upon him) made it clear that he was sent to Israelites only.
Matthew 10:5-6 says - "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Matthew 15:24 says - "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Later, he abrogated this command and sent the disciples to the entire world.

Mark 16:15 - "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15)

If you have noticed these, how you would blame Qur'an for abrogation….??. I can quote numerous such abrogations from your Bible. I already explained briefly what Qur'an meant by abrogation.

You said in defense of abrogation - Compare and contrast Qur'anic abrogation with the Words spoken by the living, loving Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ,"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away."Matthew 24:35

"The grass withers and the flowers fade, but the Word of the Lord endures forever."1 Peter 1:24-25

Ok, then read this, See a passage in this link, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%2016:9-20;&version=31; it says ""((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))"" – See the situation of the gospel which is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!. Also we do not find Heaven and earth passed away due to this interpolation in God's word……!!!!

Again, many animals were unlawful for food according to Moses' revelation (Deuteronomy 14:7-8 and Leviticus 11:4-8). This prohibition was abrogated by Paul - "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean." (Romans 14:14)

"Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled." (Titus 1:15)

The last passage is really interesting. Perhaps Israelites were defiled that's why some things were unlawful to them! But since Christians are pure, things were made pure to them. Was these not abrogation in your Bible….??.

One thing is clear. You always resort to anti-Islamic websites to know about Islam.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was completely abiding with Qur'an and he never force anybody to accept Islam with sword.

The verses you quoted 13:40;16:28;17:54;24:54;39:41;42:6,48;88:21-22 was followed as such by Prophet (peace be upon him). You haven't quoted any incident to prove Prophet (peace be upon him) acted in contrast with these verses.

Then you said – "The reason the Qur'an gives against compelling people to embrace Islam is that it is not the will of Allah for everyone to become Muslims. The Islamic scripture testifies that if Allah wanted to he could have caused everyone to believe in Muhammad's religion; but this is not what he desires since he has determined that many shall never believe in order that they may end up in hell:

Surah 4:88;6:107;10:99-100;14:4;7:178-179;16:93;32:13-14"

Due to lack of understanding about Islam, you make such comments. As per Islam, Allah shows the guidance through Prophets (peace be upon them all) to mankind. But no compulsion to accept Allah's will because human beings are created by Allah allowed choosing right from wrong. Even after receiving the guidance if somebody turn away, Allah is reminding them about judgment in the hereafter, where they receive result for their actions. The problem happening for you here, is measuring Allah's will with our limited perception. What Islam teaches is to; obey Allah and His Commandments without exploring what Allah decided for him. Allah will surely reward for following His guidance this is what Qur'an says in 4:124 – "If any do deeds of righteousness,- be they male or female - and have faith, they will enter Heaven, and not the least injustice will be done to them".

Then you quoted verses 9:29-33;9:73;9:123 and allege it is contradiction. Let us take these verses one by one.

9:29-33 says – "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. The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah.s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!. They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah. there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him). Fain would they extinguish Allah.s light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it). It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it)".

9:73 says – "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed".

9:123 says – "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."

These verses are revealed at the time of war. That's why I am always stressing, before you interpret verses of Qur'an you must know its context first and one must understand how the pious predecessors since 3^rd generation from Prophet (peace be upon him) understood and followed.

I will give you the context of Chapter 9 from Qur'an. After the Treaty of Hudaibiyah Prophet sent missions to several parts of Arabia to convince people about the truth of Islam. One such mission visited the clans which lived in the northern areas adjacent to Syria. The majority of these people were Christians, who were under the influence of the Roman Empire. Contrary to all the principles of the commonly accepted international law, they killed fifteen members of the delegation near a place known as Zat-u-Talah (or Zat-i-Itlah). Only Ka'ab bin Umair Ghifari, the head of the delegation, succeeded in escaping and reporting the sad incident. Besides this, Shurahbll bin Amr, the Christian governor of Busra, who was directly under the Roman Caesar, had also put to death Haritli bin Umair, the ambassador of the Holy Prophet, who had been sent to him on a similar minion. These events convinced the Holy Prophet that a strong action should be taken in order to make the territory adjacent to the Roman Empire safe and secure for the Muslims. So it was Prophet's (peace be upon him) duty to protect welfare of his people and secure integrity of territory. When Prophet (peace be upon him) was a normal citizen of Makkah, he had to be patient against atrocities to him and he did not resort war to anybody. When nobody gives any protection to him and there was no ruler to give him justice, he and his companions fled to Makkah. So the situation in Madina is different from Makkah. In Makkah he was a normal citizen where as in Madina he was a ruler. This is not an abrogation but a ruling depends on the situation. Allah was showing through Prophet (peace be upon him) the perfect way for the coming generation to follow him in every walks in life.

You said - And according to the Muslim expositors, Allah ordered Muhammad to force and compel the idolators to embrace Islam or be killed. For instance, according to Muslim expositor al-Qurtubi the injunction of Surah 2:256 that there is no compulsion in religion, does not apply to the pagans on the grounds that Muhammad and his followers forced the idolators to embrace Islam:

Scholars disagree and hold various positions regarding the legal status and meaning of this ayat.

· It is said that it is ABROGATED because the Prophet FORCED the Arabs to adopt the din of Islam and fought them and was only pleased with Islam for them. Sulayman ibn Musa took the view, saying, "It is abrogated by 'O Prophet! Do jihad against the unbelievers and the hypocrites.' (9:73)" That is related from Ibn Mas'ud and many commentators.

It is not abrogated and was sent down about the people of the Book in particular and means that they are not forced to adopt Islam when they pay jizya. THOSE WHO ARE FORCED ARE THE IDOLATERS. Only Islam is accepted from them, and they are the ones about whom 'O Prophet! Do Jihad against the unbelievers and the hypocrites.' (9:73) was revealed. This is the position of ash-Sha'bi, Qatada, al-Hasan and ad-Dahhak. The evidence for this position is related by Zayd ibn Aslam from his father, "I heard 'Umar in al-Khattab say to an old Christian woman, 'Become Muslim, old woman, become Muslim. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth.' She replied, 'I am an old woman and close to death.' 'Umar said, 'O Allah, witness!' and he recited, 'There is no compulsion where the din is concerned.'"

To validate your statement, please give a single incident of an idolater who is forced to accept Islam and if not accepted they were killed….??. Doing Jihad is not killing innocent people or to make accept Islam by force. I already explained several times to you. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) did not say compulsion must be done for idolaters. Actually idolaters were engaged in extirpating Muslims from the very beginning. Wars or applying force were inevitable against them. That doesn't mean they were forcibly converted to accept Islam. Towards People of Book were not commanded to Fight as they did not directly confront Muslims for war. Later in Surat Tauba it was commanded to fight as the Romans killed the delegation from Prophet (peace be upon him).

Report from Abu Dawud (you quoted) also not supporting your argument of forcible conversion. You may read it once again and tell me where you find problem.

As you always tend to quote from answering-Islam, a good reply for your arguments is mentioned in http://muslim-responses.com/Fighting_those_who_dont_Believe_/Fighting_those_who_dont_Believe_ and in http://www.answering-christianity.com/ahmed_eldin/Fighting_untill_they_do_what.htm

Read the above links also before you go for hasty conclusions. You read only Sam Shamoun's articles and he is deceiving the readers.

Then you quoted 4:89-90 to allege death penalty for apostasy in Islam. Let us see the verses.

4:89-90 says – "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-. Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then Allah Hath opened no way for you (to war against them)".

Read once again the bolded and underlined sentence. This clearly shows the stand of Qur'an towards war and answers all your allegations.

Regarding apostasy, I already explained earlier. But you are not reading properly. I will repeat.

Islamic scholars explained well about Apostasy and the consequences in the society if such practice happens. Before that, please read what Bible has to say about this. In Deuteronomy 13:6-9 – "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."

When Islam says the same, it is projected as heinous crime……!!.

Now see the context of rule for Apostasy in Islam. While Islam was weak and still growing among Jews, Christians and Pagans, Muslims did not have the full and complete religion that they needed. Some Jews and Christians wanted to take advantage of such situation to destroy Islam. They had a plan to adopt Islam first and then desert it, thus creating the impression that Islam was not a religion worth adopting. See the Verse 3:72 from Qur'aan - "A section of the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) say: Believe in the morning what is revealed to the believers (Muslims), but reject it at the end of the day; perchance they may (themselves) turn back (from Islam)."

To protect Islam from such deliberate evil attempts done by a group of the people of the book (Jews and Christians) that time, Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) ordered the death of those who enter Islam and leave it. This temporary law that was put had stopped the hypocrites from the People of the Book who carried so much hatred toward Islam to enter Islam and desert it afterwards. So one must understand this context when know about Apostasy. If a Westerner today for instance embraces Islam for a while and then changes his position due to the overwhelming false anti-Islamic media, then certainly killing that person would be a grave sin and a big mistake. There are reasons why an apostate may be excused out of ignorance, misunderstanding, being forced, and making mistakes. Many of those Muslims (who become apostates) live in societies where ignorance prevails and knowledge is scarce.

To conclude, I would once again request you to read Qur'an with context, from authentic Qur'an translations and not from Sam Shamoun or James Arlandson.

Of course, Jesus (peace be upon him) taught peace, so as Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Qur'an doesn't promote violence. On certain occasions use of force is inevitable to achieve peace and stability in society. This is what found in Qur'an. And that is wrongly interpreted in order to misunderstand the public. This you can even see in Bible verses. Christian apologists deceive by hiding that. This is evident in Biblical verses 1 Samuel 15:2-4, Numbers 31:17, Numbers 31:35-40, Luke 22:36, Matthew 10:34, Ezekiel 9:5-7 and John 15:5-6.

Finally I would remind you with following verses from Qur'an

3:19 – "The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will): Nor did the People of the Book dissent therefrom except through envy of each other, after knowledge had come to them. But if any deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account".

3:20 - So if they dispute with thee, say: "I have submitted My whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me." And say to the People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do ye (also) submit yourselves?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, Thy duty is to convey the Message; and in Allah's sight are (all) His servants.

So, it was my duty to convey you the truth. Now whether you to accept or not, it's not in my hand. One thing is sure, our belief and actions will definitely be questioned in the hereafter. As per above verse, submitting will to Almighty God is the only acceptable path to attain success in the hereafter.

May Allah helps to understand the follow the truth (Ameen).

Shaji

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".