EGGO

I remember hearing that the Qu'uran taught violence to its believers and thinking that it was all a lie. Upon reading on what people say about why they interpret that it teaches violence, I came across these lines:

8:67 "It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the
land"

47:4 "Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks"

9:5 "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them"

Are they just taking this out of context? Should I show them some similar quotes from the Bible (when I find them) :devil3:

whichphilosophy

Remember this was in the context of the battles they were fighting at the time, and pretty much standard warefare.

mirage

The mainstream Muslim interpretations make several points/excuses:

1. These verses usualy refer to groups that have broken treaties or initiated conflict.

2. Other verses about dealing fairly with enemies "balance" these.

3. The verses here are addressed only to the Prophet and His companions. These were direct instruments of God and any killings they made were God's Judgement being brought forwards, as happened by natural disaster in the Flood, for example. They hold that at the time of the Prophet, the truth of the Qur'anic message would have been apparent to all.

Of course, the real interpretation is that someone was trying very hard to motivate people to fight. These more aggressive verses all supposedly date from the Prophet's time at Medinna, when he was militarily stronger, rather than his weak earlier situation in Mecca.

On a side note, does anyone here have any familliarity with Muslim "higher criticism" and critical history (little of it that there is)? Can anyone recommend any books?

mirage

I meant other than "Ibn Warraq" stuff. (sorry, just saw the recommended books section)