For our dear M&M and Q9:4 part deux!

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Mar 11, 2007 at 14:41

Our dear M&M wrote the following gem

>I'm pretty sure what you are talking about is al-tauba 5 and not 4

This little gem again and again betrays your total ignorance of the way giving numbers to ayas in the Qur'an was done and it was done in a haphazard way and case in point is ayat al-sayf and you will find it under either 9:4 or 9:5 and only Allahu A3lam. How come you did not know that our dear M&M?

For readers interested in how the confusion of numbering of verses in the Qur'an came about you can read Michael Cook's "Koran a very short intoduction."

However the infamous ayat al-sayf or the word verse orders Muslims to go and slay the polytheists or al-mushrikeen (a shirka is a company) period. It does not say anything about msulims must slay the polytheists only in the case of transgression as per your bogus claim. So you can see that this is why it was called ayat al-sayf or the word verse.

Or: Convert to islam or get killed. So much for M&M ignorance.

Now the fact that your Allah revealed 9:6 and 7 and 8 etc... does not mean anything anymore as your Allah already said to kill the polytheists period.

But what is more damaging to your bogus falsafa is the fact that the word al-Mushrikeen was read early on by ibn Qutada as: the jews and Christians and do you know why? because in 9:30 your Allah accuses the Jews of regarding 3Uziar as the son of God (sic) and that Christians reagard jesus as the son of God. Also included unded the al-mushrikeen would be Hindus (your own ancestors), Buddhists and the rest of humanity.

Now the rest here is beyond your very poor eduaction:

1. The rasm of the word QTLUU in ayat al-sayf or Q9:4 or 5 if you wish can be read as iQTULUU or Kill but it can also be read as: QaaTiLUU by adding an alif above the qaf and a kasra below the lam and if the msulim masorites could not figure out if MLK in surat al-fatiha is Maalki or the king of (see 1924-1924 Cairo edition of the Qur'an) or was it Maliki the owner of (see Tunisian edition of the Qur'an 1969) it is either one or the other and it cannot be both.

Now why does the reading Qatiluu or fight make more sense because it fits very well with what it says in ayat al-jizya or 9:29 where it says to fight the Jews and Christians.

2. But again your Allah was a poor theologian so it very welll could be what he was really saying.

3. Or that the 3ualma did not know what the Qur'an is really saying and that the word is qatil and not iqtul. Again you rallah's command of classical Arabic was poor.

4. Or that your Allah got smart after revealing ayat al-sayf and realized that if msulims kill al-mushrikeen that those infidels will stop being the source of this mafia tax called al-jizya and your Allah and his rasul will not be able to collect 1/5 of the loot! Do you think that this is indeed what really happened?...

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".