I keep hearing that the people who think the Koran promotes killing is due to mis translation.
every translation (8) that I have read all called for killing.
To live among the infidels till you are strong enough to kill them.
I have seen videos of mosques calling for suicide bombers and maryter’s.
I have seen children talking how they want to die for allah.
then I hear tpeople counter hat the christians killed in the inquisitons and promoted war…
but that does not fly because the New Testament, which overides the Old clearly states thou shall not kill, and love thy neighbor.
So IO guess its ok to allow islamic teachings of killing since the christians did it thousands of years ago and have denounced it.
If you’ve read the Koran 8 times, in 8 different translations, why don’t you just buck up, learn Arabic, and figure out what the damn thing actually says?
And the actions of the practitioners of an established religion rarely have much to do with the guidelines and tenets of that faith. At least, they’re not necessarily representative.
Hate the sin, not the sinner. Hell, go ahead and hate the sinner. Just don’t hate the sinner’s relatives, you know?
My history and theology are both shaky, but I’m quite sure that the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition both went on since the New Testament was written.
Which would make the Christian deathmongers worse in my mind, as they would be murderous hypocrites.
Who is it that’s “allowing” Islamic teachings of killing? I mean, promoting violence is a crime itself (in some places). People have in fact been arrested for it.
As far as the OT and the NT go… if the OT totally overrides the NT, why is the OT still part of the Bible? It’s superfluous, if that’s true. And I would suggest that some Christians do not share your view of the OT. I’m sure others will suggest the famous names.
Anyway, there’s a possibility (IIRC) that a translation (yay irony!) of the Bible would render that particular commandment as “thou shall not murder”, rather than kill. Certainly I have known Christians who believe that killing is wrong but unfortunetly must be done in certain circumstances. I mean, if they didn’t, no Christian would ever kill another person, which seems somewhat unlikely.
As to the actual basic question… I have no idea, not knowing Arabic. But I would guess it probably does promote killing. It’s possible it may promote killing more than the Bible. To which I would say… well, so?
In this type of discussion we have to bear in mind that the Koran is supposed to be interpreted in the light of the life of the Prophet - hence the hadiths.
This is what the English translation of the surviving accounts of the earliest biography of mohammed say. Or this account of what this source says it says.
Let’s just note that there’s a different between promoting and depicting. Swaths of the OT is simply a history book of the Jewish people. So while it does depict war and killing, those are just historical events.
I don’t believe that there’s anywhere in the Christian bible that outright says you should murder or kill people, except criminals. But as I haven’t read the Koran, I couldn’t say how it holds up in that regard. I have heard that it specifically commands spreading Islam by the sword, but I have no idea if that’s true. (Is it?)
Yes it does (and the 'holy book of varieties of Islam are Koran + Hadiths. Hadiths can differ by sect). But there are also the added complication of non linearity of the text so it is difficult to know which sura’s abrogate which. The sword verses are held by some to abrogate the ‘play nice’ verses.
Guess it depends what you mean by that. The Koran does say it’s okay to kill depending on the circumstances. I think what bothers many moderate Muslims are things taken out of context.
For instance, many use this sura as evidence that Muslims the Koran says that Muslims should kill unbelievers wherever they find them.
But it does specify if the turn renegades and then the immediate following sura says this:
It specifically says not to kill those who aren’t fighting you.
Where’s you get that from? Are you claiming that’s waht the Koran says?
And you think the ones you hear from that tell you the belief the Koran promotes killing is due to mistranslation deny that those videos or leaders exist? They don’t.
The NT overrides the OT? I don’t think so.
Matthew 5:18-19 (King James Version)
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Luke 16:17 (King James Version)
And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Matthew 5:17 (King James Version)
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
**2 Timothy 3:16 (King James Version) ** (bolding mine)
**All **scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient
children according to Old Testament law:
**Mark 7:9-13 (King James Version) **
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
The Pharisees criticize Jesus for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: gMatthew 15:4-7 (King James Version)
For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
Peter mimicking the OT regarding slavery: 1 Peter 2:18 (King James Version)
Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
John 7:19 (King James Version)
Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?
John 10:35 (King James Version)
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
You gotta be kidding. So?! Assuming that the text does call for killing in the name of and for the furtherance of Islam, “So”?!!! Even in light of the fact that not a small number of Muslims take these writings as instructions and HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THEM IN CURRENT TIMES, “So”? In light of the attacks here, England, Spain, Bali and other places around the world, “So”? In light of the thousands of innocent women and children that have been murdered in Iraq and elsewhere by suicide bombers, “SO”? In light of the Christians being murdered in the name of Islam in Africa and Asia, “So”. Are you fucking kidding me?
Let me ask you, at what point might your care meter be nudged above “So”? Does the fact that these writings appear in a religious give it a free pass? Does it give you a free pass on critical thinking? Is there any point where religious text—which is acted upon by thousands of adherents (at least)—might get more than a shrug of your shoulders?
x-ray vision makes a very good point. The New Testament says the Old Testament remains in effect; however, in Islam, there is the concept of abrogation of verses. Some verses remain in effect, others are null & void based on a verse considered to have been revealed later.
Then, of course, one has the whole issue of schools of Hadith, not to mention some areas with barely literate mullahs and even jerks like Bin-Laden who isn’t even a Qur’anic scholar.
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me. (KJV)
Here’s a whole bunch of other different translations:
(NKJV) ‘But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.’"
(NLT) And now about these enemies of mine who didn’t want me to be their king-bring them in and execute them right here in my presence.’ "
(NIV) But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.’ ”
(ESV ) “‘But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’”
(NASB) “But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence.”
(RSV) Luk 19:27 - But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me.’"
(ASV) But these mine enemies, that would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
(Young) but those my enemies, who did not wish me to reign over them, bring hither and slay before me.’
(Darby) Moreover those mine enemies, who would not [have] me to reign over them, bring them here and slay [them] before me.
(Webster) But those my enemies, who would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me.
(HNV) But bring those enemies of mine who didn’t want me to reign over them here, and kill them before me.’"
Just for laughs, here’s the Vulgate:
verumtamen inimicos meos illos qui noluerunt me regnare super se adducite huc et interficite ante me
There’s more and every translation agrees that Jesus said to kill everybody would not accept him as king. Since I can also read the Greek, I can further vouch for the accuracy of those translations.
That would look pretty damning to anyone who wanted to see Christianity in a bad light and was disinclined to investigate any deeper into the context and interpretation of that particular quotation.
Quote mining religious literature for violent sounding passages is easy to do. It just isn’t going to be terribly informative about the practitioners of that religion.
You misunderstand; I’m not saying “Eh, so what. You win some, you lose some”. I’m saying “So? What is to be done?”. My point (at least as I meant it) was that if it turns out it’s true, if the Koran contains many more encouragements to kill than the Bible does, where exactly does that leave us? Do we ban it? Do we treat Muslims more suspiciously? Do we do nothing? What does this mean, in context; do we judge all holy texts against the Bible in terms of unpleasant exhortations? Is there a level or strength of such things in particular at which we act, but not before then? In essence, if the OP’s premise is correct… what do we do with this knowledge?
A “so” of shrugged dismissal would, as you point out, be pretty ludicrous. I guessed I thought it too ludicrous for anyone to think I meant that. After all, I wouldn’t be posting in the thread if I didn’t think it mattered… although I suppose the boards do have their fair share of nutcases now and again . Just to be perfectly clear; whatever the answer is here, and whatever any response might be to that, this is a very important issue that can and does mean life or death many times over. I think the only difference between your feelings and mine on this is that I wouldn’t single out Christian deaths specifically.
The Psalms (Old Testament) are the source of this little nugget of Christian Love:
And from a more modern translation:
OK, maybe the OT isn’t to be judged as harshly as the NT. But that is not mere reportage of what the Jews went through, that is a cry of pure hatred and bloodlust against a people whose only crime was cheering when Jerusalem was torn down. What are we to think of Jews and Christians for keeping that little gem in their holy text?
This had me curious, since it was a passage that I was not familiar with.
This passage is from Jesus’ parable about the nobleman who goes away to be coronated, first giving each of several servants different responsibilities and expecting each to produce results accordingly. The verse immediately previous is the better-known one about 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away."
That is, the first noted excerpt is not Jesus directly telling his disciples to kill enemies in front of Jesus, but Jesus saying that the nobleman wished to kill any disloyal subjects.
ok…
so lets all take it for granted that most religious writings have some refernce to violence…
so now we need to look at what is taught in CURRENT temples,churches and moques.
There is no question that in most mosqus martyrdom,suicide bombings and anti-relgious things are preached.
In 40 years of attending church , studying religions I have not heard of any that promote negative actions against others in different religions.
like religions that have seen that the violenve was wrong in the history of their religions…islam still teaches it to the letter…
they do not tech it for history referneces, but for current practices.
