You can be sure that the Muslims teaching about the Qur’an will eagerly quote 5:32 and be careful, at the same time, to avoid quoting the verse that follows, 5:33, that glosses 5:32 and gives it its sense. Another favorite Qur’anic verse that the apologists like to quote is 2:256: “there is no compulsion in religion.” That sounds straightforward, and non-Muslims will be expected to take it at face value. But a little thought about the matter will lead to quite a different conclusion. Non-Muslims are not strictly “compelled” — this is the Muslim view –to give up their religions and convert to Islam. They have a “choice” — so supposedly no “compulsion” — either to convert to Islam, to be killed, or to live as dhimmis under Muslim rule. As dhimmis, they must pay the Jizyah (a capitation tax on non-Muslims) to the Muslim state, and will also be subject to a host of lesser disabilities: displaying identifying marks on both their dress and dwelling; riding donkeys rather than horses; stepping aside on footpaths so as always to yield the right of way to Muslims. Isn’t this seeming “choice” really a form of “compulsion”? In order to avoid either death, or being forced to pay the Jizyah and observe other requirements made on dhimmis, all of which are daily reminders of their well-deserved humiliation, the only way out was to convert to Islam. While some Christians and Jews paid the Jizyah, others, over time, in order to free themselves of this onerous tax, converted to Islam. Any fair-minded person would describe that as “compulsion.”
And what about Muslims themselves? Muslims were not free to choose a religion other than Islam. The punishment for Muslims who wish to leave Islam — that is, to be apostates — has always been death. That too, sounds a lot like “compulsion in religion.” If you have ever wondered about how the handful of well-known apostates from Islam — e.g., Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq — have managed to survive, the answer is simple: they now have the security of living in the advanced West. But they don’t dare travel back to the Muslim countries they came from, and they know all too well what the phrase “there is no compulsion in religion” actually amounts to in Islam — that is, to nothing.
As for the 109 Jihad verses in the Qur’an — see, e.g., 9.5, 9:29, 2:191, 4:74 — one assumes that the Muslims will try, for the non-Muslims they are “teaching,” to “contextualize” those verses. The superficially plausible patter will likely go something like this: “Look, we all know that Arabia in the seventh century was a violent tribal society. Muhammad wanted to bring peace to all the warring tribes. He saw himself as a peacemaker. But many of those tribes saw Muhammad’s message of peace — a pax Islamica — as threatening their way of life. They made war on him, so much so that in the last ten years of his life he and his followers were forced to fight in 65 different campaigns. Of course there was violence, and Muhammad did what he had to, to protect his people by way of self-defense. Each of the verses that are about violence has to be seen in the context of a particular space and time — western Arabia, in the early 7th century. Exactly which enemy of the Muslims is alluded to in which verse? This is the kind of thing scholars of Islam can make their life’s work; we just don’t have the expertise. Remember, Muhammad almost never names those enemies — he didn’t have to, for his followers at the time knew exactly who was fighting them, and against whom they had to fight back. And the main point is this: these were verses that applied at the time of their writing to specific enemies of Islam. They were meant to be descriptive of a particular situation, not prescriptive for all Muslims for all time. It is this that the islamophobes keep missing. It is simply bad faith on their part to insist, without any evidence, that a verse written 1400 years ago, about a fight among certain tribes in Mecca or Medina or some oasis in the western Arabian desert, must surely apply to all people, for all time, and everywhere. This misapprehension is what makes some people, quite unnecessarily, fear Islam. Just exercise your own historical sense, put those verses back into the context to which they were meant to apply, some 1400 years ago and relax.”
So this is what the non-Muslims who attend these “Learn Islam From Its Source” meetings will have learned: 5:32 but not the indispensable gloss of 5:33; 2:256, as if “there is no compulsion in religion” really did apply to Islam; the Five Pillars, without any additional information about Zakat or Salat. This focus on the Five Pillars gives Muslim instructors a chance to use up time discussing rituals that are essentially innocuous, while spending less time on the Jihad verses, that can be explained away only by claiming that they require “contextualization” to be properly understood. Non-Muslims are to be reassured that these Jihad verses apply only in context (Western Arabia, early 7th century). Are there still non-Muslims willing to believe this? Unfortunately, a great many.
By not including any of the Hadith or Sira in these “Learn Islam From Its Source” lessons, it bears repeating, almost all of the most disturbing aspects of Muhammad’s life will be avoided.
Muhammad is the central figure in Islam, the “Perfect Man” to be emulated by all true believers. His words and deeds, then, are indispensable for a full understanding of Islam. By pretending that the Hadith and Sira can be ignored, and that non-Muslims can best “learn Islam from the source’” — that is, from the Qur’an alone — what is presented as pedagogic common sense turns out to be a sinister exercise in taqiyya. And the worst part of it is that the victims of this will not, unless they study on their own, in advance, know enough to realize what is being withheld from them about Muhammad, and why it matters so much. Nor will they be sufficiently prepared to understand the highly misleading version of the Qur’an that is presented to them.
Before you show up for these “Learn Islam From Its Source” meetings, prepare yourself by learning about Islam from non-Muslim sources. Two lucid guides by Robert Spencer can be recommended: “Blogging the Qur’an” and The Truth About Muhammad. If these guides are read and thoroughly assimilated, you will then be in a position to attend these events and ask pointed questions. Among them, as previously noted above, are these: Who cannot receive Zakat? Why and how are the kuffars denounced seventeen times a day during the recital of Salat (the five daily prayers)? How do Muslims understand and apply Qur’an 2:256 (“there is no compulsion in religion”)? What does 5:32 mean if read by itself? And if read in the light of 5:33? What do Muslim apologists mean when they stress the need to “contextualize” the Qur’anic verses about violence and terrorism, and how convincing are their attempts to do this?
And then you should be well-prepared to bring up those episodes in the life of Muhammad that are to be found not in the Qur’an but in the Hadith and Sira, which you will have to read and reread on your own, once you learn that you are being deliberately dissuaded from consulting the Hadith and Sira by those helpful Muslims insisting that you “Learn Islam From Its Source.” You will have the satisfaction of watching as your initially smiling hosts suddenly become not quite so affable, and indeed, may become quite unpleasant about all this information you appear to have learned — how dare you? — without checking with them, they who so disinterestedly were determined to help you “Learn Islam From the Source.” For they will insist that only the Qur’an can be fully trusted, that non-Muslims have a hard enough time grasping that text, that the Hadith and Sira pose even greater problems of authenticity and of meaning — so that non-Muslims are likely to become unduly confused. “It would be better,” you will be told, “if you would please stick to the Qur’an, as by far the most important Islamic text, and focus, please, on those parts of it that mean the most to Muslims, such as the Five Pillars, and the injunction against killing at 5:32 and the guarantee of no compulsion in religion at 2:256. And how do we know that these are the most important verses? Because we are Muslims ourselves.”
But the damage will have been done to the “Learn Islam From Its Source” campaign — you will have made an end run around your Muslim pedagogues, by reading, before meeting them, the Qur’an, with commentary, learned the real significance of those verses — 5:32 and 2:256 — favored by Islamic apologists, learned (from a commentary such as “Blogging the Qur’an”), the ways in which Zakat differs from Christian charity, and how reciting the five daily prayers, or Salat, brings with it kuffar-cursing seventeen times a day. Such a commentary will have explained, too why the violence in the Qur’an is not descriptive (as in the Bible), as you will be told but, rather, prescriptive, and applicable for all time.
Even more important than your self-study of the Qur’an, undertaken before your encounter with local Muslim apologists who are ready to misrepresent that text in by-now well-practiced ways, will be the study you undertake of the Hadith and Sira, the very texts that are left out entirely by those engaged in the “Learn Islam From Its Source” campaign. And all you have to do is raise your hand and ask a few unwelcome questions based on that reading. Mention of Aisha, Kinana of Khaybar, Asma bint Marwan, Abu ‘Afak, the Banu Qurayza, should do the trick. You will be in a much better position to ask uncomfortable — even unanswerable — questions. Among your Muslim would-be teachers, who had hoped to pass over in silence many of the details of Muhammad’s life, the result will be ill-concealed fury. For these episodes in Muhammad’s life are impossible to explain away, and deeply damaging to the image of the Prophet that Believers wish at all costs to protect.
And that’s an outcome devoutly to be wished.
Stardusty Psyche says
Very well reasoned and written article.
While those of us who are so strongly opposed to Islam are often accused of taken passages out of context, it is in fact the Muslim apologist who takes “no compulsion in religion” out of context.
Further, the so-called moderate Muslims who cherry pick a few nice sounding passages here and there are enablers of violence by first indoctrinating the young into the idea that every single word in the Quran is the word of Allah, that Muhammad is the exemplary man to be emulated in every respect, and here is the Quran go read it an recite it and memorize it and study it in detail cover to cover.
The Quran then becomes a land mine, a lurking source of violence, as its full passages become absorbed, and the supporting material of the Sunnah is learned, the young man is “radicalized”, which simply means he learned what the texts actually say.
hamit says
“Are they seeking a religion other than Allah’s, when every soul in the heavens and the earth has submitted to Him, willingly or BY COMPULSION?” (Qur’an 3:83)
What! Submitted by compulsion? How is that possible since 2:256 guarantees no compulsion in religion?
commonsense says
Great question! I never noticed this passage previously, and wonder what mental gymnastics are used by the ulema to explain such an egregious contradiction in this infallible, perfect book.
gravenimage says
Great quote, hamit.
JW_Reader says
Islam use the most fraudulent marketing techniques that have ever been known to mankind. Everyone should read the fine print, before they judge! The devil is in the detail. ICNA, that put up up the billboard, does not have to invent any deception. It is all ready there in their un-holy Quran.
commonsense says
I just called the number on the billboard and ordered a Koran. I’m curious to see what translation is used (I have the Dawud and the Pickthall, and have thumbed through the Arberry and the Ali), and what, if any, passages are whitewashed, such as in Ali re: wife beating). I also want ICNA to spend money on postage and on printing more Korans – I would hope that readers here would blitz the call center with multiple requests for Korans, ordering many for putative relatives, friends, and pets. Let the folks at ICNA incur some heavy expenses, printing and shipping out so many Korans. Oh, yes- I would request, say, ten or fifteen or more copies at a time to be distributed to church, synagogue, or scout groups. Blitz ’em hard.
commonsense says
A postscript to my comment, above: If ICNA does agree to send multiple Korans, don’t waste them. Distribute them to family members, close friends, and anyone who might be receptive to reading, finally, what Muslims read in their book of hate. Reading the Koran will not be sufficient for one to grasp fully the malevolent role of Sunnah in Islam or how abrogated verses are often cited by Muslim apologists, but the Koran’s numerous passages which are explicit in their fomenting hatred of Jews and Christians and mandating warfare against them are eye-opening and often harrowing. 9:111 is, to me, particularly loathsome in its call for believers to kill and be killed for Allah’s sake. Hopefully, the recipients of your Korans (courtesy of ICNA) will be receptive to your offers of elucidation to clarify some of the more ambiguous verses and passages found in this book, the malevolence of which will escape the uninformed reader (such as the condemnation of Jews and Christians – albeit unidentified as such – in the Fatiha). It would be ideal if you had a sufficient number of Korans (again, courtesy ICNA) to distribute to church or synagogue groups, or other groups, both religious and non-religious, to be used for events intended to raise awareness of what Islam actually teaches, and inculcates (as Hugh would say) in its believers. While it might be necessary for two people to share one Koran, at least there would be enough of them to make this only a mild annoyance. (I realize that many, if not most, churches and synagogues may be averse to holding such events, but if these were presented as exercises in comparative religion, discussions about Islam may be less unpalatable and less threatening to those who wield the authority to allow such an event.) Once your recipients have read their free Koran, I would encourage those who are receptive to call ICNA on their own and order still more copies for distribution to theirpersonal circles of relatives, friends, and colleagues. Let ICNA’s willingness to give away Korans be their ultimate undoing. The more people who read the damned book, the better.
gravenimage says
Good for you!
simpleton1 says
A good series of points commonsense.
A book is easy to book mark with points and notes, of your own understanding, and easily looked back on for reference.
http://www.koran-at-a-glance.com/
This helps, in finding the chronological order.
Hi lights many things, but most importantly the abrogating verses, that nullify the earlier “peaceful” verses..
The abrogating verse form in allowing change
The last verse Koran 87:6-7 is the most insidious to me. By degrees, sort of different stages, to different people, so it is for certain purposes, to remain hidden, and then for others to be activated, if it is considered that they will ‘get’ the “real”, “perfect man” in that “excellent example”.
HugoHackenbush says
Some other questions to ask, particularly if an “expert” (aka apologist) is “explaining” (= lying to gain advantage for Islam):
Whenever the issue of “interpretation” is raised regarding Islam ask the following questions:
1. Are there both peaceful and violent passages in the Koran (yes or no)
2. Were the violent passages revealed after the peaceful passages (yes or no)
3. Is there a principle in Islam of “abrogation” by which later revelations have authority and precedence over the earlier passages (yes or no).
4. Given that in Islam all will be judged by Allah on the last day by weighing one’s good versus bad deeds, what is the one and only guaranteed way to reach paradise (particularly if you have been a “bad boy” by drinking alcohol, engaging in “illegal sexual intercourse”, having a pet dog, having pictures or drawing in your house and having infidels as actual friends)?
5. When the apologist for Islam complains that the above questions are too “simplistic” for such a “nuanced” topic simply ask him to explain why he is right and the leaders of ISIS and al-qada are wrong based on quoting the Koran.
By asking the above questions you do not need to get into a chapter and verse tit-for-tat argument that they will win via their ability to quote more from memory. You simply make THEM lie and then can later point out the lie to others. At the very least they will be caught off guard by the questions and will appear to be hiding something (which they are).
steve brown says
What do you think would happen if a ”Group”like ”Christians for the world” built a billboard in Mecca Saudi Arabia that said, ” Free King James Bible” – ” Learn that Jesus alone is the way from it’s source – The Holy Bible” ? I say heads would be chopped off in broad daylight.
DiploNerd says
We should all call them and get our free Qur’ans. Then we can highlight and bookmark some “favorite” verses and give them to everyone who will take them.
There are worse things they could be spending their money on.
Aussie Infidel says
Well reasoned arguments from Hugh. It might well be that some Quranic verses written 1400 years ago, do not necessarily “apply to all people, for all time, and everywhere.” Nevertheless, people fear Islam because many jihadis quote those verses while carrying out their murderous rampages. Clearly those verses provide the motivation for jihad, and will continue to do so as long as they remain in the Quran – which is why Islam has no place in a civilized society.
It is also very convenient for Muslims to claim some verses are “taken out of context”, but they do the same themselves when it suits them. Others may also reject the Hadiths and Sira, but the essence of those verses has been extracted and written down in the Sharia as ‘sacred Islamic law’ – which does apply to all people, for all time, and everywhere. But we can’t relax for a minute. For purposes of governance, the Sharia is the important text, rather than the Quran. Islam is run by the ‘small number’ of aggressive militants or psychopaths in the Muslim community, who rule by fear. The ‘moderates’ are irrelevant.
The five Pillars of Islam simply provide the religious ‘veneer’ to obscure its underlying violent ideology. It’s the unwritten ‘SIXTH PILLAR’ or JIHAD, which more than anything else, defines Islam as the same bloodthirsty supremacist death cult it was during the time of Muhammad.
Hugh is right – a great many non-Muslims in the West are reassured by Muslim dawa peddlars, that Islam is a religion of peace. And many of these people are politicians or entrenched in the bureaucracies.
simpleton1 says
Aussie Infidel, Good points
“taken out of context” and it seems that context can be on a sliding level and this is one of the abrogation verses.
“do not necessarily “apply to all people, for all time, and everywhere.” ”
Most insidious to me. By degrees, sort of different stages, to different people, so it is for certain purposes, to remain hidden, and then for others to be activated, if it is considered that they will ‘get’ the “real”, “perfect man” in that “excellent example” that is found in a hadith.
John Densler says
If you want to understand the Koran, Sira, and Hadith, learn about the work of Dr Bill Warner. He has a series that lays out the way to learn in a systemic way in a number of his books from an Objective way. If you would like a quick overview, see the videos produced by the Fairview Baptist Church. http://fairviewbaptistedmond.org/islam-101/
penelope says
islam is P U R E T R A S H , not one thing about islam can be called good
HugoHackenbush says
See my comments and the reply above. AH!, the old “meaningless when translated” argument. Note the shifting premises being used here. 1. You are ignorant, read the Koran etc. 2. You took things out of context. 3. Even if you have the context you didn’t read it in Arabic etc. So, are the free Koran copies then meaningless since they are in English? If only an Arabic speaker can understand all of Islam then we should look to Saudi Arabia as embodying the only true realization of Islam. Ok then. Message received loud and clear. I suggest looking up the interview with the Saudi royal executioner on MEMRI TV. It’s a little hard to find but quite informative. I think my favorite punishment has to be the cutting off of a hand and foot on opposite sides and letting someone bleed to death as Muhammad did to one group of nomads that had killed a camel shepherd. THE MISERABLE INGRATES!!! They did this after he helped them back to health by advising them to drink a mixture of camel milk mixed with camel urine (you can find this narration in the Bukhari hadiths). Now, to be fair, we don’t know the osmolality and sodium content of the camel urine and so, given the desert environment, this may actually have been beneficial in terms of rehydration and sodium replacement but I think it’s fair to say that better treatments have subsequently been developed. But, the camel mild + urine does have divine sanction as it was advised by Muhammad (“In whom you will find an excellent example” per Allah->Gabriel->guess who?!)
Donald R Laster Jr says
When one understand that Mohammad first tried to convince people to follow his god Hubal, chief god of the Arab pantheon of 360 or so gods also known as Baal, he was friendly. During this period he tried to convince Jews his god was the same as Hubal and that Christ was simply a prophet. He was rejected by Jews and Christians since the knew who he worshiped and they could clearly see the flaws in Mohammad’s statements and lies. For instance if Christ was only a prophet then he would have been a false prophet due to Christ’s statements and one does not follow a false prophet. Even those who worshiped rejected him. The Islamics will talk and present this early part of Islam and not point out that after Mohammad’s lies and claims were rejected he repudiated all of the friendship text. He switched to murder, tax, and do anything you want routine to non-Islamics that we are having to deal with today.
But the way to understand what Islam teaches is to get a Qur’an and read it. Always go to the best source available. At least several are available in English. And learn about the practices of deception – especially in the ordering of the Qur’an. Here are two ISBNs 978-0-913321-01-0 and 978-0-9785528-8-6.
Donald R Laster Jr says
And always remember the word “allah” is Arabic for “the god”. It is not a name. The god of Islam is Hubal (Baal) the moon god chief god of the Arab polytheist religion of around 360 gods. Mohammad was trying to eliminate the worship of all gods but his god. What is interesting is a Pharaoh tried the same thing with the Egyptian god Ra from the history I have read.
explainist says
follow the logic:
the only true quran is a quran written in Arabic
only a Moslem may handle a quran written in Arabic
you have to agree for all eternity that the quran is the inerrant true word of Allah to become a moslem
ergo, you have to agree that every word in the book is the divinely inspired word of Allah before you are allowed to read the book.
you have to be out of your mind to follow that logic and become a moslem. belief is proof of abject stupidity