₦airaland Forum

hassinho707:
➜No one is denying what the verses say. The issue is that verses must be read in their full context, not isolated and given a meaning the text itself does not support.
For example, in the **, ** 5:33 explicitly describes people who “wage war and spread corruption in the land.” That is clearly describing violent criminals who attack society, not ordinary people who simply follow another religion.
Your second claim about “32 different Qurans” is also a common misunderstanding. Muslims use the same Arabic Qur'an worldwide. What you are referring to are different translations into English and other languages not different scriptures. Even in the earliest manuscripts the Arabic text has remained the same.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah `Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city. When you (Muslims) came to us, we requested safety for ourselves, children, property, and followers of our religion. We made a condition on ourselves that:

➜We will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church, or a sanctuary for a monk,
➜Nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration
➜ Nor use any of them for the purpose of enmity against Muslims.
➜ We will not prevent any Muslim from resting in our churches whether they come by day or night,
➜ and we will open the doors [of our houses of worship] for the wayfarer and passerby.
➜ Those Muslims who come as guests, will enjoy boarding and food for three days.
➜ We will not allow a spy against Muslims into our churches and homes or hide deceit [or betrayal] against Muslims.
➜ We will not teach our children the Qur'an,
➜ Publicize practices of Shirk (polytheism),
➜ Invite anyone to Shirk
➜ or prevent any of our fellows from embracing Islam, if they choose to do so.
➜ We will respect Muslims,
➜ Move from the places we sit in if they choose to sit in them.
➜ We will not imitate their clothing, caps, turbans, sandals, hairstyles, speech, nicknames and title names,
➜ or ride on saddles,
➜ Hang swords on the shoulders, collect weapons of any kind or carry these weapons.
➜ We will not encrypt our stamps in Arabic,
➜ or sell liquor.
➜ We will have the front of our hair cut,
➜ Wear our customary clothes wherever we are,
➜ Wear belts around our waist,
➜ Refrain from erecting crosses on the outside of our churches
➜ and demonstrating them and our books in public in Muslim fairways and markets.
➜ We will not sound the bells in our churches, except discretely,
➜ or raise our voices while reciting our holy books inside our churches in the presence of Muslims,
➜ Nor raise our voices [with prayer] at our funerals,
➜ or light torches in funeral processions in the fairways of Muslims, or their markets.
➜ We will not bury our dead next to Muslim dead,
➜ or buy servants who were captured by Muslims.
➜ We will be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.'
➜ We will not beat any Muslim.

These are the conditions that we set against ourselves and followers of our religion in return for safety and protection. If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.'
The Pact of Uma

THE Pact of Umar is the body of limitations and privileges entered into by treaty between conquering Muslims and conquered non-Muslims. We have no special treaty of this sort with the Jews, but we must assume that all conquered peoples, including the Jews, had to subscribe to it. Thus the laws cited below and directed against churches apply to synagogues too. The Pact was probably originated about 637 by Umar I after the conquest of Christian Syria and Palestine. By accretions from established practices and precedents, the Pact was extended; yet despite these additions the whole Pact was ascribed to Umar. There are many variants of the text and scholars deny that the text as it now stands could have come from the pen of Umar I; it is generally assumed that its present form dates from about the ninth century.
The Pact of Umar has served to govern the relations between the Muslims and "the people of the book," such as Jews, Christians, and the like, down to the present day.
In addition to the conditions of the Pact listed below, the Jews, like the Christians, paid a head-tax in return for protection, and for exemption from military service. Jews and Christians were also forbidden to hold government office. This Pact, like much medieval legislation, was honored more in the breach than in the observance. In general, though, the Pact increased in stringency with the centuries and was still in force in the 20th century in lands such as Yemen. The Pact is in Arabic.

Kobojunkie:
Again, this is all false information you spew here regarding what is stated in Surah Al-Maidah vs 33. The Pact of Umar, from the 7th-9th century rule of Islam over the Kafirs, instead reveals that the Surah Al-Maidah vs 33 was instituted against any of the Kafirs who would attempt to violate the Dhimmi status imposed on them by the Mohammedans.🥱🥱

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Pact_of_Umar

Kobojunkie:
@ Ironfaceman, the following is in response to your post, "Does The Koran Support Terrorism?"

First, please pick up or download a copy of "A Two-Hour Koran (A Taste of Islam)" and "Sharia Law for Non-Muslims (A Taste of Islam)", both by Bill Maher, if you are not versed on what the Quran and Hadiths say on any subject. These are condensed, unbiased documents to help you and anyone who wishes to know about Islam. 🥱🥱

Nairaland seems to hate it when one tries to post facts about Islam. That much I have come to realize at this point. So, to honestly answer your question, I would suggest that you pick up the books above and try to read through them for yourself. The first book contains at least 100 references commanding violence against those who are not Mohammedans. And the second book details the conquests carried out by the founder of the political system that is Islam, all under a period of about 23 years, against people who did not care for his ideology. 🥱🥱

The primary reason why those who claim to be moderate in their beliefs do not speak out against the atrocities is that they understand that even that aspect that they do not engage in is part and parcel of their very belief system. 🥱🥱

Seun

Ironfaceman:
Thanks for your open opinion. I will try to get the book.

Till now you still don't get?! Why would the political actors, Muhammad Yusufs pick Islam. Why didn't Evans give his crime a christian cover?
There you go, mentioning christian crusade of hundreds of years ago- people that moved on, it's 2026 o. This is what I expect everybody should move on from barbaric acts in the name of religion

sonmvayina:
Because it is idolatry, Everything God forbids in his laws is what Christianity is built on.....

Christmyhope:
Ignoramus .. there's no basis for intellectual discussion because you have killed it with your idle notion.

sonmvayina:
let me enumerate some
1. Human services. several times in the Tanakh, God explicitly said he hated human sacrifice, he even calls it an abomination. he punished the Israelites for passing their children through the fire of Moloch. why would he turn around to send somebody as a sacrifice for sin. he already dropped that update a long time ago...confess and forsake, he would forgive and restore. see 2nd chronicles 7:14.
2. The idea of an intermediary or middle man. God also warned the Jews in the second of the 10 commandments he gave to Moses, "Do not have any other god before me" this simply means no middle man or God, come to me directly. my hands are not too short.
you get my point now.

Christmyhope:
I quite understand your position but you must know that God is just and righteous. The earth is the Lord and everything therein says the Holy scripture. When everything that belongs to the Lord has been marred by sin and sin Inclinations. Is it still right to say that such thing belong to God? But remember that God does not condone sin and everyone that sin belongs to the devil because the devil himself has been sinning from the beginning. Should God look-on as his creations get lost in sin? Should God just make mere proclamation " I forgive everyone" without addressing the legal and spiritual requirements for sin.

sonmvayina:
you just made two fundamental errirs there .
first you said everything God created belongs to him then went ahead to exclude the devil. The fact is that the devil is God's property. whatever he does is what God has created him to do...NO MORE NO LESS., He has no mind of his own. ..There is no where God ever referred to him as the source of evil. in fact,God in Isaiah 45:7 said he is both responsible for good and evil, light and darkness.
secondly you have failed to reference the fact that it is God that created us like this....with the ability and capacity to make choices., except you want to tell me that God made a mistake,so he knows we can make the wrong choices too....and if he says, if we confess and forsake he would forgive, why don't you think that is sufficient for him??