Yeah, explain the context of each passage. What was going on? Are these proverbs or are they scriptural imperatives?
When the Koran is cited by Muslims, or apologists such as yourself, in response to assertions it is a violent religion, it is often discussed in such a way as to shut down a meaningful exploration of the text. A few mild passages are usually offered, as if these fully represented the contents of a scripture containing 6,000-plus verses.
But, the Koran -- literally interpreted to mean "recitation" -- is a collection of diverse materials that include polemic, praise, eschatology, law, narrative, battle calls, and details of the domestic life of the Prophet.
The Koran contains five commands to kill and 12 commands to fight (literally, "try to kill"). Most are found in the second (verses 190, 191, 193, 244), fourth (vv. 76, 84, 89, 91) and ninth (vv. 5, 12, 14, 29, 36, 123) suras.
And, in classical Muslim discussions of these verses, two verses attracted more attention than any others. They came to be known as "the sword verse" (9.5) and "the verse of tribute" (9.29).
The verse of tribute concerns the "people of the book" -- generally understood by Muslims to be faith communities possessing a scripture, especially Jews and Christians. The command is to fight those who have been given the book "until they pay the tribute (jizya) out of hand and have been humbled."
The command in the sword verse is to "kill the associators (mushrikin) wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush." At face value, therefore, polytheists appear to be at greater risk than Jews or Christians. But Jews and Christians only evade the same fate by subjugating themselves to Islam and paying a fee to do so.
The Arabic verb in all of these verses is not the verb related to jihad. Rather, it is the verb qatala in its first ("to kill") and third ("to fight, try to kill") forms.
The Koran contains many other verses using forms of qatala which -- though not imperatives -- appear to encourage fighting or killing. Among these is 61.4: "Allah loves those who fight in his way."
These are the commands. But what do they mean?
David S. Powers, professor of near eastern studies at Cornell University, has noted that Muslim scholars of abrogation such as Ibn Salama (d. 1020) claimed the "sword verse" cited above (9.5) had abrogating power over 124 other verses, including "every other verse in the Koran which commands or implies anything less than a total offensive against the non-believers." U.S.-born historian John Wansbrough found that the sword verse "became the scriptural prop of a formulation designed to cover any and all situations which might arise between the Muslim community and its enemies." Influential Islamist authors such as 'Abd al-Salam Faraj, Maulana Maududi and Sayyid Qutb have all expressed their agreement with the classical interpretation of the commands to fight and kill.
A famous illustration of this Islamist tendency is in the pre-9/11 communiques of Osama bin Laden. His "Declaration of War" of October, 1996, makes prominent use of Koranic commands to fight and kill. His Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders of February, 1998, opens with the sword verse and applies it directly to those he considers to be the modern enemies of Islam.
Indeed, one of the greatest challenges facing peace advocates in Muslim nations is that the Islamist voices that seem to have the greatest appeal to youth are those that portray the Koranic commands to kill as clear and unequivocal. Some of these Islamists have already carefully processed Western criticisms and have deliberately reasserted the classical understandings. For instance, Egypt's Sayyid Qutb, a guiding force of the Muslim Brotherhood (from which al-Qaeda sprang), wrote that the tendency to interpret the Koran as if it enjoins only defensive war is an error of Muslims minds "defeated by the pressure of unfavourable conditions and the treacherous propaganda of the orientalists."
It's not a peaceful religion, except for the Muslim cowards that want us all to just get along.
Kind of like Catholics that think abortion is okie dokie. It's obviously, emphatically, contradictory to their religion -- but, somehow, they're able to ignore that and call themselves Catholic anyway.

Reply With Quote