Quote From: michaelacDo you know what "in context means"? It means IN ARABIC, with the explanation from the scholars (people who are studied in Islam, jurisprudence, fiqh, Arabic language, history, etc) based on the hadith that show when the verse was revealed and what was happening when it was revealed. That is the context I am talking about not the verse that comes before and the verse that comes after the one Valeria is referring to.
The "hunting of Jews" is based on a specific battle fought between the Muslims and a specific Jewish tribe. This is an established historical fact and anyone who has actually studied Islam knows that this was not a mandate for all time but for a specific tribe who broke a treaty with the Muslims. Do you want me to find the actual hadith on the subject? BTW, I am not hiding the fact that God commanded those to fight against this tribe but it was a specific case as I mentioned.
I already posted tons of stuff on beating women. It is ludicrous and not supported by the Quran or any hadith. Period.
There is also no text about "killing infidels" in the Quran in fact it talks about the EXACT opposite. I have also posted several statements on this with verses from the Quran. Search my name and you can see those.
No one Muslim omits verses from the Quran. This is considered leaving the fold of Islam. That is definitely NOT what I am saying or have said in these posts.
The Quran is the revelation given to Muhammad in Arabic anything else is not the Quran. This is a major difference between Islam and specifically Christianity as you mentioned. We do not have the right to attempt to change Islam because we might not like something. This then turns from worship of God to worship and following one's own desires.
As a convert, I can tell you that people convert after VERY serious study. It is not a lifestyle you adopt just for a change in atmosphere, to snag a man or whatever crazy ideas people may have out there. It is about true belief and when we have questions we can ask a knowledgeable person whether at the mosque or otherwise and there are always answers to those questions. Those answers are based on PROOF. There is a huge emphasis on this in Islam. No one can say something about Islam without textual evidence. The textual evidence is Quran and hadith (recorded sayings and actions of the Prophet).
I know exactly what the dictionary says "context" means.
Sounds like "in context" for Islam has it's own meaning. And, unless a person reads the Quran in Arabic, and without "explanation from the scholars (people who are studied in Islam, jurisprudence, fiqh, Arabic language, history, etc.)", based on the hadith, they are taking it out of context. Why then is the Quran translated into English or other languages?
A person can simply read other religions' books without all this, and in different languages/translations.
BTW, no one has the right to change Christianity and no one can change Christianity. Also, one can get a very good understanding of the Bible without reading it in the original languages, Hebrew (Torah and rest of Tanakh) or Greek (New Covenant).
Perhaps you and others (scholars) should teach what you've said to those who call themselves Moslems and take the violence of the Suras literally or whole countries (Islamic) whose cultural practices either transcend or ignore Quran or take it literally, or perhaps rather than "literally" your wording would be "out of context'. World terrorism that is associated with Islam would stop--perhaps.
Why have not the millions (or the billion) of peaceful, non-violent Moslems put a stop to the highjacking of this religion by the "few" radicals and extremists? If a "few" persons of other religions highjacked a religion (let's just say Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, etc.) and caused a bad name for it throughout the civilized world by violent acts of terrorism against other nations and through practices that are abhorred in that religion, I believe their religious leaders would speak out to them and against them and seek to repair the damage. I believe they would publicly distance themselves from the terrorists, particularly after major attacks. I believe they would go on the airwaves, place adds in newspapers, magazines, etc., develop many web sites, blog on websites, volunteer to speak at schools and places of worship, whatever it takes to dispel the notion that their religion is one of violence. When we don't speak up, it appears we are in agreement. At least you are speaking out on these boards about some issues...
