Wow, a bunch of out of context quotes from a religious document that are bunched together to try to prove some thesis? I’m shocked! Shocked!!
The Koran is several hundred pages long in its English translation. I don’t think that six paragraphs is really representative of what it might say, anymore than picking all the verses about the Israelites killing infants and keeping the juicy virgins is representative of what the Old Testament says.
I made mention of context, but in what context is the sura’s in?
I stand by my comment.
IMO, in the study of any religious scripture, context is paramount. In the absence of rational basis (which scripture lacks), context is the only thing that can give scripture meaning. I think your position is defensible if one excludes the importance of context, but I personally can’t do that.
But what is the context of these verses?
Scripture’s context isn’t always a mystery. There are historical elements. But everyone I’ve heard talk about the koran’s just says “context” and walks away.
And every good Christian practices and believes everything in the Bible, right? Especially in the case of Leviticus. :rolleyes:
That’s a good point TWG. I remember in the weeks after 911 quite a few news channels had representatives of the ministry of islam on to ask them questions and to let them give their say about 911. The ones I saw asked about these verses had nothing to say about context. I know that the average person isn’t going to be able to blend the historical with the scriptural and thereby reveal the context of the verses but these men had nothing to say about the context. Of course these men were just a few, but still, being leaders they should know the indepth aspects of the koran.
Still what is the context?
Double Darren,
Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house. Ezekial 9:6
He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee. Ezekial 26:8
I saw the LORD standing upon the altar: and he said, Smite the lintel of the door, that the posts may shake: and cut them in the head, all of them; and I will slay the last of them with the sword: he that fleeth of them shall not flee away, and he that escapeth of them shall not be delivered. Amos 9:1
Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones. Leviticus 20:2
And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. Deuteronomy 13:10
See how easy it is?
DMC, I love you.
DMC, I’ve heard of even better ones than that. But if you asked a minister of christianity might that person be able to explain the context the verses are in? I would expect so, being ministers. Then why couldn’t the ministers of islam do the same when after 911 there was a huge focus on islam and some who asked about these verses from the sura?
“Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces.”
-Malachi 2:3
Mmmmmm dung.
…my point escaped me…
Anyway, show me a holy book that doesn’t have a few verses thrown in about smiting the unbelievers and all that shit.
Still, no one has said anything explaining the context of
**When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters (non-Muslims) wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent (convert) and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful. Sura 9:5
Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.
Sura 9:73
“Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. God does not guide the wrongdoers.”
Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden and do not embrace the true faith until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.
Sura 9:29
Fight for the sake of Allah those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. Allah does not love the aggressors.
Kill them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage. But do not fight them within the precincts of the Holy Mosque unless they attack you there;
Sura 2:190**
I’d rather have dung slung on my face than to be killed 
Koran context please.
Double Darren,
I compiled that list in a grand total of about five minutes, so I’m sure I could have found better ones.
If you wish to discover more about the Qur’an, “Jesus is the only way” sites aren’t your best source of information. Reading the Qur’an and the Bible are the best ways to gain an understanding.
If you’re so inclined:
Qur’an
Bible (KJ version)
DMC, you have to do more than just read books like the Bible or the Koran. There is a lot of scientific study that goes into this type thing. Combined with theology there is archaeology, geology and many other disciplines of science put together to help explain what was being refered to in the scriptures.
My question is where is the context for the verses in the koran, also why was this avoided by the guys I saw on television, who in my opinion should have known a little at the least. This may be helpful in figuring out why it seems offensive to people who are supposed to be killed. If there is no context to be found then that would mean these students are justified in their objection.
Fretful, outstanding rant! I give it an A+++. 
I must say that I am absolutely floored by UNC’s wishy-washiness. The powers that be should have stayed the course and made this book a requirement for all its freshmen. My take on this is that UNC isn’t trying to convert folks to Islam, but rather trying to expand folks’ horizons. The motto of the university is “Lux et Libertas,” isn’t it? How can folks grow and learn and find enlightenment freely if they don’t learn to think critically? If reading a book makes a student ask questions about his/her own faith, or god forbid, ask questions and want to learn more about other faiths, then how is that such a catastrophe? If for some reason I cannot fathom it is such a catastrophe for a student to read about other cultures/religions and so on, then that student needs to reconsider attending any university and therefore make room for the students who actually do want to learn. Hmmphf.
This whole situation just confuses the hell out of me. How is it that it’s okay that Christians can go all over the globe to convert other nationalities to Christianity, but when any other religion does so, or when some Christians think that other religions are doing so, then that’s absolutely forbidden? If that isn’t the greatest kind of hypocrisy, then I just don’t know what is. I’m not saying that Muslims are trying to convert folks. In fact, IIRC, Muslims are forbidden generally from openly trying to convert folks to Islam or to shove Islam down other folks’ throats. It would seem to me that if Christianity, Islam, Judaism, or whatever religion is that great, then the folks who practice it should not feel threatened by other faiths. But I digress.
The thing that gets me is how folks can go on about how they are offended about a book, when they haven’t attempted to even read it! How do they know?! 
UNC, like any other institution of higher learning, has an obligation to the students it serves to maintain an atmosphere where free thought can flourish. For UNC to do any less is a disservice to its mission, IMHO. And in its current handling of the freshman reading requirement, UNC has fallen far short of its commitment to educate. :mad:
No, you actually don’t have to do more. I’d much rather one form one’s own opinion than listen to someone who has an obvious bias, as did your cite.
Sure there is, which is one of my beefs with these religious texts. If God/Allah/Yahweh/IPU wanted me to understand, they should have made the texts a bit more clear and less contradictory. Of course, there’s always the option that these books were compiled from texts from various authors, thus making individual snippets pretty much just someone’s opinion on a particular subject.
I gave you the links. Following them is up to you.
You’ll have to ask them if you want specifics, but I’m guessing they ignore parts of the Qur’an which might cast them in a bad light, much as Christians ignore the parts of the Bible that do the same for them.
The Bible would have you kill someone who works on a Saturday, but I’m guessing you haven’t loaded up the Uzi and headed to the mall lately. Should weekend workers be offended by books that discuss Biblical texts?
If you’re looking for someone to actually justify something in either of these books, I’m not the right person to even try. They are both just fairy tales to me, albeit interesting ones at times.
Wow, I think this is the first time a thread I started has made it to page 2 in less than a day. A couple of things I’d like to respond to:
To the best of my knowledge, public schools can indeed require students to read the Bible in an academic context. We certainly read it in my AP English class at a public high school.
They certainly will be – that’s the point of the program. If I were a discussion group leader, I would be delighted if one of my students took the trouble to research dissenting scholarship and present his or her findings to the group.
I can back you up on that one. When I was at the U of Michigan(bastion of conservative thought that it it) The bible was indeed required reading in several English courses.
I can back you up on that one. When I was at the U of Michigan(bastion of conservative thought that it is) The bible was indeed required reading in several English courses.
I just heard an Islamic scholar on the radio say those verses refer to a particular battle Mohammed was exorting his followers to fight. And not a general principle. Well that’s what he said.