As Sahabi had already told you (as I had informed him earlier in another thread), The Quran refers to itself as "The Book", so I'm not so sure your
reply to post by pstrron
Anyone that is not a Muslim is considered an infidel and if they refuse to convert, worthy of death. They do however believe that Jesus was a prophet
yet refuse to do what he said.
It's not PC to state it, but the "people of the book" were only tolerated in Mohammed's early years.
Mohammed's life can be fairly neatly divided into two parts... a time of tolerance (while the people of the Arabian Peninsula held the power and the
Muslims were militarily inferior), and a time of brutality, enacted once the Islamic forces were powerful enough to force all others into
Once you realize the sequence, and understand that the Muslim concept of "abrogation" (that is, later verses take precedence over and replace the
earlier ones), you can see that the tolerance for "people of the book" was limited, and didn't last. As soon as Mohammed had the army to do so, he
obliterated the Jews - in a battle that Muslims still celebrate today.
The only "peace" in Islam is the "peace" that exists when all the world is converted or living in submission.
The famous "No compulsion in religion" verse is a Medinite verse, after Muhammad had consolidated power, AND after a battle where 300 muslims had to
face off a 1000 Meccans (which the muslims won, however). The Achtiname of Muhammad, which came up recently in another thread here- an oath of
protection to Christians, was written several years after Muhammad consolidated power in Medinah. And Muhammad certainly didn't "obliterate the jews",
their community was documented to have openly lived in Arabia even several decades after his death. And I'm sorry, but you'll be hard-pressed to find
a single muslim who can tell you the date of any of the early battles, and when it falls, and how they "celebrate" it. People like to paint with a
general brush, and just attach whatever negative things they can to Islam, very often in total error, with the result of people like pstrrron thinking
it is okay in Islam to "Lie, cheat and steal", and so on.
But despite all that being wrong, this whole "Abrogation" story that critics of Islam use to knock over anything peaceful about Islam (even when it
doesn't chronologically fit to do so), is a farce. A tradition of "abrogation" certainly existed among many groups of muslims in history, and even
exists now, but it is absolutely not applied in the sense of "Oh, this came before, this came after, toss that old thing out". That is absurd. The
Islamic scripture certainly doesn't work like that. There are some instances where abrogation can be applied where a change in the rules openly
occurred, and was openly mentioned (i.e. with alcohol originally being simply advised against, to it being prohibited, or when the muslims changed the
direction they prayed towards from Jerusalem to Mecca), but one can't simply claim abrogation left and right whenever one feels like it.
reply to post by Sahabi
I am sorry, Sahabi, but it seems your lack of knowledge on this topic is showing again. For your benefit, and for the posters before, let me quote a
Surah Al-Imran, v20, instructing Muhammad (and by proxy, Muslims) on how to deal with the People of the Book:
So if they (the People of the Book) dispute with you, say: "I have submitted my whole self to God and so have those who follow me." And say to the
People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do you also submit yourselves to God?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn
back, Your duty is to convey the Message; and in God's sight are all His servants.
Verse 64 of the same Surah:
Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with him; that we
erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than God." If then they turn away, say: "Bear witness that we (at least) are bowing to God's
I totally admit, it isn't ALL roses. Islam defined itself as a continuation of (and a removal of corruption from) the Abrahamic message, so there are
Same surah, verse 69:
It is the wish of a section of the People of the Book to lead you astray. But they shall lead astray not you, but themselves, and they do not
Same surah, verse 19
The only true Religion before God is submission to His Will: The People of the Book disagreed among themselves only after the knowledge had come down
to them. But if any deny the Signs of God, God is swift in calling to account.
Same surah, verse 113
Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand for the right: They rehearse the Signs of God all night long, and they
prostrate themselves in adoration. They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong; and they hasten in all
good works: They are in the ranks of the righteous. Of the good that they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knows well those that do
Surah Al-Ankabut, Verse 46:
And argue not with the People of the Book unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that
which has been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our God and your God is One, and unto Him we submit ourselves.
And so on. Obviously injunctions and references and talk not of the past, and certainly not a derogatory term. I apologise for the quote-fest, but I
hope you see it was all relevant.
I am amazed that Wrabbit had the most level-headed response in this thread
edit on 12-10-2013 by babloyi because: (no reason