NationStates Jolt Archive

Unbelievers

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

Say: "O ye UNBELIEVERS!
I worship not that which ye worship,
And ye do not worship that which I worship;
I shall never worship that which ye worship,
Neither will ye worship that which I worship.
To you be your religion; to me my religion."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taken word for word from the Koran, the Islamic Holy Book.

Unless I'm totally whacked out, this is advocating peace with other religions. Saying it is okay for you to not be a Muslim. Saying to each his own.

Would somebody please find me a section of the Jewish and Christian books that says the same?

Ouch!

So no one can find one?

Methinks they'll remain reticent, Klonor. That was an excellent quotation, btw. I have a certain admiration for Islam...though I've never been able to figure out where the imams come into it (and I'll stop right there 'cause I don't want to derail your thread, sorry, sorry, sorry)

-DT.

Come on, somebody get involved here!

So, a thread claiming all Muslims are evil terrorists gets several hundred people all yelling at each other, and another thread which shows how Muslims aren't evil terrorists gets nothing. I think we need get our priorities straightened.

Come on, somebody answer me!

i'll answer! i can't find one. that may be because i'm not going to look. i hate religion so i'm not going to look in the bible if i can help it

Okay, seriously, somebody start a dialogue

Excellent find. I'm not aware of such in the bible, but I do distincly remember a section about how you should never help a foreigner.

Anyone know it? I can't recall which book/phrase it was..

I doubt you'll get a responce, people seem to be avoiding this thread like the plague

it's bashing their religion so they will avoid unless they flame it, but they can't really flame you for because of they way you put it

lol, yeah. Chalk it up as a victory, Klonor.

As for me, i'll keep it in mind when someone says that Islam is naturally intolerant :)

Shrug, there is of course the Book of the Sword, which advocates killing all nonbelievers, and the fact remains that Mohammad was a warlord...but if one verse taken out of context helps you feel good, more power to you.

Fuel on the fire but:

Romans 2:14-16

14. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15. Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;

16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

Now of course everyone is going to argue over what it means, and that it is out of context, and that it contradicts the rest of the NT. But the same, I suspect, could be said of the above Surah.

Thank you DeaconDave for finally taking the time to think about my opening post. You know, the part where I ask people to bring forth other info! I'm not bashing Judaism or Christianity here (I, myself, am Jewish) I'm trying to start a discussion.

Oh, and just FYI, that is the context. A Sura is kinda like a chapter in the Koran, this is the entirety of Sura CIX (Capter 109).

Maybe so, but the fact remains Mohammad, and the Koran, advocates conversion at sword point.

I'm not denying that Mohammed did, but since when is an entire religion judged on the actions of its founder? Abraham was going to kill his own son because God told him to, does that make every Jew a person willing to shed the blood of their relatives?

Come on! This is a good discussion topic! Focus on the good side of religion for once!

I'm not denying that Mohammed did, but since when is an entire religion judged on the actions of its founder? Abraham was going to kill his own son because God told him to, does that make every Jew a person willing to shed the blood of their relatives?

Well, the example of Jesus Christ is the only thing that keeps me an ardent Christian. I see alot of threads about how evil Chrisitianity is, because Chrisitians do this, that, and something else. There's been alot of violence and brutality and intolerance amongst Muslims as well, but does that mean that all Muslims should abandon their religion because of the actions of others? I think people of true faith, no matter what religion they are or what God they worship, maintain their faith because they believe in the righteousness of their religion's founder and the goodness of the example that person set. I'm sorry, but why is my religion to be judged by the actions of its imperfect followers?

Jesus Christ was the not the first Christian. He was Jewish. His followers were the first Christians (if even that could be said) but not Jesus. Jesus followed the teachings, laws, and customs of Judaism. The Last Supper before he was Crucified was even a Jewish service, the Passover Sedar (I think. Thos partiular fact I learned long ago and could be remembering incorrectly).

It'd be like saying God was the first Jew. He was not. Abraham was the first Jew, God simply told him what was what. Just like Jesus told his followers waht was good/bad/okay etc.

Anyway, that's neither the point of this thread nor has there been any judgement of Christianity. Please stay on topic.

No, its exactly on topic. It is unfortunate that you fail to see this. Christianity is by definition the following of Christ's teachings and examples. He therefore can be considered our founder, our root, the reason for our religion existing at all. Your pointing out that Christ was a Jew is very factual, but unfortunatly, meaningless in this context. My post was obviously a response to your comment that a religion shouldn't be based on the actions of its founder, which statement I find ludicrous. It is not the actions of the followers that define a religion, but its basic principals as set forth by its founder/source of inspiration (for those of us who like to cling to particular words and use them as a means to discredit an argument). Rather than attempt to reply to my post, you chose instead to try to discredit me by stating things that are obvious, and then calling my post off topic all together. For some reason, I was expecting more from you, but apprently, I was mistaken. I would like to once again ask you to not assume that I am ignorant, or somehow inferior to you, and would like to remind you that your taking a condescending tone with me does not make it so.

Firstly: You have seriously misunderstood me. I am in no way saying the original teachings of a religion are for naught and that you should judge it entirely on the actions of the followers. I am saying that it is a blend, that you can not judge a religion purely on its founder (Who may/may not have been a good person) or its followers (who may/may not have distorted the original message).

Secondly: Even my post that you responded to was off topic. The topic of this thread is about a passage of the Koran supporting religous freedom and asking for similar passages from the Jewish/Christian books, debating the merits of the founders and judgment of the followers is not the point of the this thread. Just because the author goes off topic doesn't mean you should follow him.

Thirdly: You saying that I think that I am superior to you is making me think I'm superior to you. I didn't before, but your constant accusations that I think I do is giving the impression that you think I am and are striking out at me in an attempt to hide it.

It's extremely easy to pick passages out of any religious text and attempt to "let them speak for themselves." What's not easy is to study and digest an entire religious text and find out what the particular religion is really about.

And that is why I started this thread, in an attempt to start a dialogue between the different religions while citing texts from the actual Holy Books. I'm trying to bridge the gap, as it were.

And yes, upon re-reading it I do see that my opening post does seem like it's bashing Christianity/Judaism and holding up Islam as the sole fair religion in the world. I really didn't mean to have it like that.

Firstly: You have seriously misunderstood me. I am in no way saying the original teachings of a religion are for naught and that you should judge it entirely on the actions of the followers. I am saying that it is a blend, that you can not judge a religion purely on its founder (Who may/may not have been a good person) or its followers (who may/may not have distorted the original message).

Following this pattern of thought, I should abandon my religion because some Catholic priest sexually molested a child.

Secondly: Even my post that you responded to was off topic. The topic of this thread is about a passage of the Koran supporting religous freedom and asking for similar passages from the Jewish/Christian books, debating the merits of the founders and judgment of the followers is not the point of the this thread. Just because the author goes off topic doesn't mean you should follow him.

So you, as the author, reserve the right to state off-topic opinions without having to defend them. How very convenient.

Thirdly: You saying that I think that I am superior to you is making me think I'm superior to you. I didn't before, but your constant accusations that I think I do is giving the impression that you think I am and are striking out at me in an attempt to hide it.

So that I draw attention to the fact that I find your arrogant, condescending, mightier-than-though tone inappropriate bears evidence to my own inferiority complex, while at the same time making you feel superior? How very profound. I could go on about this for pages, but suffice it to say that the very fact that you would even present this quasi-psychological analysis as a retort only confirms to me that you are not worth spending any more time on. Good day to you sir.

No. Did you miss the part where I said blend? Meaning not just the followers. Also, even if a religion is judged entirely on the followers, since when is the action of an extreme minority taken to represent the whole? The last time I checked that's called stereotyping. Do that against an ethnicity and its called racism. That is a bad thing.

I have no clue what opinion you are referring to that I have not defended. Seriously, you have just lost me.

Could you please point out what " arrogant, condescending, mightier-than-though tone" you are referring to? Like I just said, you have really lost me.

You know what Klonor? Lets just drop it. Going over the things we have written, going over the things I have written, I must admit that I am somewhat ashamed. I've known and respected and admired you for a long while, and I do feel that this exchange will only lead to a schism between us which could be easily enough avoided; which I would like to avoid. So here, have an olive branch and kiss. ;)

Thank you DeaconDave for finally taking the time to think about my opening post. You know, the part where I ask people to bring forth other info! I'm not bashing Judaism or Christianity here (I, myself, am Jewish) I'm trying to start a discussion.

Oh, and just FYI, that is the context. A Sura is kinda like a chapter in the Koran, this is the entirety of Sura CIX (Capter 109).

I did not know that, I always thought a surah was like a verse.

As a counter point.

Surah CX:

When the victory granted by Allah and the Conquest come and you see people embracing the religion of Allah in large numbers then celebrate the praises of your Lord, and seek His forgiveness. He is ever disposed to Mercy.

Here I think it is talking about celebrating victiories over people not governed by muslims and their consequent conversion to Islam.

Ah, but telling people to celebrating a victory in war is very different from telling them to start a war. The Axis powers started WWII but the Allies sure were happy as hell when they won.

EDIT: And may I ask what edition of the Koran you're reading? (Edition referring to the translation to English, since there is only one version of the Koran and not many varieties like with the Christian bible) Mine has some slight differences from what you posted (Same message, but slightly different word usage)

Ah, but telling people to celebrating a victory in war is very different from telling them to start a war. The Axis powers started WWII but the Allies sure were happy as hell when they won.

Ok, but why did this war start in the first place, I thought it was becuase the surrounding people were not muslim.

Here is what I had heard regarding islam, and please correct me if it is a misconception.

Islam teaches that fellow "people of the book", i.e., christians and jews, are to be free to worship anyway that they want. However, no muslim must ever be placed under the authority of a non-muslim, thus there is a need to control the government wherever muslims live. Also all christian and jewish men who live in muslim lands are subject to Jizyha, an extra tax.

Now I'm not saying that this means that I believe that all muslims want to go out and conquer the world, but this was my understanding of the Qu'raan. Like I said it could be very wrong though, I don't really no that much about it after all. (Also even if this is literally true, I suspect most muslims would look at this as a hard line attitude and not really reflective of their beliefs, but this is a scriptural disscussion).

Unbelievers

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

Say: "O ye UNBELIEVERS!
I worship not that which ye worship,
And ye do not worship that which I worship;
I shall never worship that which ye worship,
Neither will ye worship that which I worship.
To you be your religion; to me my religion."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taken word for word from the Koran, the Islamic Holy Book.

Unless I'm totally whacked out, this is advocating peace with other religions. Saying it is okay for you to not be a Muslim. Saying to each his own.

Would somebody please find me a section of the Jewish and Christian books that says the same?
I don't know of any verses in the Bible, Old or New Testament, which are parallel to this quote (though the passage in Romans brought up by DeaconDave is at least in the same ballpark).
I'm not sure, however, that your quote really does advocate peace with other religions. You seem to be gaining this impression from the last line,
"To you be your religion; to me my religion".
This line could have other interpretations, however. One that occurs to me is, "You will receive the consequences of your beliefs; I will receive the consequences of mine", which is neutral, benificent, or hostile, depending on the tone it is spoken in.

Dave, I don't think that passage refers to any specific war, rather to just war in general. The chapter before that one is the one from my original post, there doesn't seem to be any lead up. I think it's just a general "Rejoice if we win and gain converts." Of course, I could easily have just really missed something

Regarding the Jews and Christians not allowed to rule Muslims thing, I have to go to a non-Koran source. Not official religous dogma, but a story that says the opposite. One of the first stories of The Arabian Nights: Tales of a Thousand and One Nights (Which I just finished reading over the weekend) deals with a King who rules over a city populated with four religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and.....damnit, I can't remember the name of the fourth religion. I think it was "Nazarene" but that really doesn't ring any bells with me). Anyway, though that particular stories focus was on the entire city being bewitched and turned into fishes by the evil wife of the King, it does mention how the King who ruled that city was not Muslim. Arab, yes, but that does not specify a religion. A Muslim King from a different state, who happened to find the city with everybody being a fish, helped break the curse and restore the Non-Muslim King to power.

The story isn't official but it does show how Muslims are okay with non-Muslims being in charge of Muslims. They'd probably prefer the Muslims being in charge (Just like I'm praying for a Jewish President some day soon) but there's no Commandment from God.

Would somebody please find me a section of the Jewish and Christian books that says the same?

Torah: Deuteronomy 4:19-21

It basically says that all other things that can be worshipped have been given to all other peoples of the earth, but that the Jews are to only worship the deity who brought them out of Egypt.

It also goes on to say that respect should be shown to foreigners (strangers, other peoples, etc) because Jews were once strangers in a strange land themselves.

I don't know of anything in the Gospel or the writings of Paul.

Oooh, that's excellent! Would you mind posting the actual lines?

Dave, I don't think that passage refers to any specific war, rather to just war in general. The chapter before that one is the one from my original post, there doesn't seem to be any lead up. I think it's just a general "Rejoice if we win and gain converts." Of course, I could easily have just really missed something

Regarding the Jews and Christians not allowed to rule Muslims thing, I have to go to a non-Koran source. Not official religous dogma, but a story that says the opposite. One of the first stories of The Arabian Nights: Tales of a Thousand and One Nights (Which I just finished reading over the weekend) deals with a King who rules over a city populated with four religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and.....damnit, I can't remember the name of the fourth religion. I think it was "Nazarene" but that really doesn't ring any bells with me). Anyway, though that particular stories focus was on the entire city being bewitched and turned into fishes by the evil wife of the King, it does mention how the King who ruled that city was not Muslim. Arab, yes, but that does not specify a religion. A Muslim King from a different state, who happened to find the city with everybody being a fish, helped break the curse and restore the Non-Muslim King to power.

The story isn't official but it does show how Muslims are okay with non-Muslims being in charge of Muslims. They'd probably prefer the Muslims being in charge (Just like I'm praying for a Jewish President some day soon) but there's no Commandment from God.

I was flicking around the reference you gave to get some idea of it's context, and that Surah - as you point out - was right next to it. From what I gather it refers to a specific victory in battle just before Muhammed's death, and I beilieve the war was precipitated in order to propagate the control of Islam over the surrounding area - although I could well be wrong.

As to the authority of christians and Jews: I recognize that this is not in practice the case. After all Turkey, Indonesia and Bangladesh have non-muslims in their governments. So obviously it is not something that a great many muslims consider vital. You 1,001 nights reference further highlights that. I was just asking it as a purely textual matter about the Qu'raan, and like I said I could well be wrong about it.

Torah: Deuteronomy 4:19-21

It basically says that all other things that can be worshipped have been given to all other peoples of the earth, but that the Jews are to only worship the deity who brought them out of Egypt.

It also goes on to say that respect should be shown to foreigners (strangers, other peoples, etc) because Jews were once strangers in a strange land themselves.

I don't know of anything in the Gospel or the writings of Paul.
For Updated NASB, I have Deuteronomy 4:19 "And beware not to lift up your eyes to heaven and see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, and be drawn away and worship them and serve them, those which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven."
This doesn't mean that God allotted everyone the sun, moon, and stars as objects of worship, just that He allotted them as lights in the sky for illumination, navigation, and beauty (see Gen. 1:14-18).
There is a bit in Acts (Acts 17:22-31) where Paul is talking to Athenians on the Areopagus in Athens. Among other things, he says that they're wrong to worship idols (v. 29), but that God has overlooked their ignorance up to that point (v. 30). However, God now calls them to repent and trust in Jesus (v. 30-31). Sort of similar, but kinda different as well.

For Updated NASB, I have Deuteronomy 4:19 "And beware not to lift up your eyes to heaven and see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, and be drawn away and worship them and serve them. For those are that which the LORD your God has allotted to all the other peoples under the whole heaven."


That's a really, really bad translation. I have placed, in red, which words have obviously been craftily left out. You can see the original Hebrew text at:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/tan/deu004.htm#019

Also, you must read on to verse 20 and not stop at 19. God is saying, "For I am the god who took you out of egypt." This is God's way of saying, "Yes, there are other gods and other ways to worship, but I am the one who took you out of Egypt, so you must worship only me."

Not a bad price to pay for salvation, I suppose. However, this was said specifically to the Jews. Everyone else (all other nations, other peoples, etc) can worship whatever they like however they like and it has no bearing on the God of Abraham or those who follow him.

Only Christians feel it is their "job" to convert others. I find that sad.