The prophets (you know, the islamic one) call to convert by the sword

Any civilization that turns to theocracy will gradually decline as they ignore everything else but follow archaic agricultural norms.

This has nothing to do with prophets or the rules of religions or sky books , "sword" is a personal fake personal belief, for example when Portuguese ,Italians, England and Americans concurred Africa, Australia and India using guns and slavery has nothing to do with Christianity and the Bible .
so "sword " came as a reaction of hatred towards Israel settlement on Palestine and Jerusalem as well as the american policy against some islamic countries ,whereas Islamic rules forbid killing as well as Christianity .
I'm so sorry to say that people are getting revenge from each other endlessly .
our planet became a jungle .
not only that but also the hatred and discriminations among Muslims and Arabs (among themselves) these problems came out of ignorant and thousands of Arabic accents which lead people to misunderstand the concepts of "holly Quraan" they don't care about learning and understanding this holly book .
just watch people in Iraq on TV they just walk happilly back and forth to the holly grave of the grandson of prophet Muhammed "Imam Hussain " without understanding his personality , and arabs themselves who killed "Imam Hussain" .
also Muslims don't respect the muslim philosophers they consider them as liars and criminals , and burn their unique books .just like Europe before 400 or 700 years ago who used to consider philosophers criminals .
its a whole chaos .

Permoda, I take it you are not western, for 'sword' has a number of stand in meanings. Back in the prophets day the main weapon was a sword, and it was a threat of death, or was death, but in literal terms, was conversion by force. So converting by the 'sword' can refer to any new technology weapon or violent method, and the way it is used to convert by force/coercion.

The founding of Islam was historically recorded, and this (convert or die) did happen, and it's prophet did command it (and that's the simplified version), and there are those muslims that believe in those commands to this day.

Many were converted to Christianity by the sword as well. The Scandinavians and the Teutonic Knights along the Baltic Sea area.

this is your own opinion .
sword =tanks= phosphoric bombs =guns=killing + hatred.
I don't care about any religion but I respect them and it's up to you I respect your points .But remember death is death , all people die . crimes are every where , innocent people are killed every where even in USA. the factory of atomic bombs and modern pollution .

Talk, this is quite true. The difference is that Christians aren't commanded anywhere in the Bible to do so. Their founder (Jesus) actually taught peace. Mohammed the prophet commanded his people to convert by any means, including the sword. At one stage it was a 'duty' to do so, until the prophet suffered a defeat by a militarily superior force. At this time he modified this 'duty' to say 'if you are faced a militarily superior enemy, you are to convert by any other means possible until you are strong enough to defeat your enemy'.

They are very different founding principles.

If you are going to respect a religion, perhaps you should know what it is you are respecting. And a blanket 'I respect any religion' is just silliness. Satanists have good claim to belonging to a religion.

You are thinking that death is the problem? You missed the problem then, and the very significant difference between a crime causing death, and convert or die.

John 14:6, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

This sounds like bullying by fear. Seems like Jesus is guarding the gate to Heaven.

Vikorr,

Though i could refute your arguments, i would like you to, first, quote me from the Holy Quran where you see that "convert or die by the sword" theme, and ill gladly tell you where your interpretation went wrong.

Those are just quotes, but I find those from many different literary sources. I realise they are removed from context.

As for the rubbish about 'revelation' - if you read of the prophets political situation at the time, it becomes patently obvious that he changed his doctrine to suit his political situation, rather than the word of god changing and becoming clearer as it came along.

The same thing happened with 'The Satanic Verses' - they weren't verses where the prophet was influenced by the devil. They were versus that were politically expedient at the time, and later became problematic.

What has that to do with anything that I have raised here? By the way, before you answer, I'm not Christian. Also, what one religion does is not a justification for why another religion is okay. Also, aspects of many religions are flawed. Also, some flaws can be ignored, while others should not (and if Islam eventually has it's way, will not be able to be ignored)

Mars, answer me this - if I were living as a non-muslim in a muslim country, would I be a second class citizen? I do by the way, already know the answer to that, having both read it from numerous sources, and observed muslim imams to admit the answer in TV interviews.

Most religions have this 'us' versus 'them'. You name it is there:

Judiasm call non-Jews: goyem
Christians: Pagans
Islam: Infidels
Hindus: Lower than untouchables
Buddhists seems to be the only one that doesn't give a negative name except they feel they are the 'enlightened' as there no God with Buddhism.

It is unfortunate that Islam, the religion of peace, hope, harmony, goodwill and Brotherhood had been badly tarnished by the perpetrators of various terrorists acts and barbarism as seen in recent years.

According to the Islamic Holy Book - the Quran, God has bestowed honour on every individual irrespective of skin colour, race, nationality, etc. Freedom is one of the great favours of God and its deprivation is a great misery. Under the Islamic dispensation, no one can be made a captive without a just cause. Prisoners can only be taken in the event of a regular declared war or battle and not for any other reason or under any other pretext. The Holy Quran specifically states:

It does not behove a Prophet that he should have captives until he engages in regular fighting in the land. If you take captives, except in regular fighting, you will be regarded as desiring the goods of this world, while ALLAH desires for you the Hereafter. And ALLAH is Mighty, Wise (8:68)

This verse cuts at the root of not only slavery practice in years gone by but also demolishes any supposed justification of modern day hostage-taking and hijacking of innocent people not involved in actual combat.

In his farewell address the Holy Prophet of Islam gave special instructions regarding good treatment which should be meted out to prisoners. The Holy Prophet said:

O men, you still have in your possession some prisoners of war. I advise you, therefore, to feed them and to clothe them in the same way and style as you feed and clothe yourselves ..... To give them pain or trouble can never be tolerated.

More specific commandments on the ethics of war and treatment of prisoners are contained in the fifth verse of the forty-seventh chapter of the Quran. This comprehensive verse can be paraphrased as follows:

"When engaged in a regular battle, it should be fought bravely and relentlessly. War can be continued till peace and freedom of conscience are established. Prisoners are to be taken judiciously. Free men cannot be deprived of their liberty without a just and reasonable cause. When war is over, prisoners should be released as an act of favour or on taking ransom or by negotiating a mutual exchange."

In the history of Islam all these methods have been used for releasing prisoners. A novel method to get release was that the educated prisoners could teach reading and writing to those who were illiterate, in lieu of ransom.

This verse further strikes at the roots of those who would justify modern day terrorism in the name and under the banner of Islam.

Envoys are privileged people in the Islamic system. They enjoy full personal immunity. They are not subject to political ransom, no matter how worthy the cause may be, and to kidnap them is a heinous crime. They must not be killed, molested or maltreated. There are numerous instances from the Holy Prophet's life which illustrate the application of these principles.

Thus Islamic scriptural commandments and the precepts of the Holy Prophet of Islam concerning diplomatic immunity are free from ambiguities. In a nutshell, taking hostages and maltreating envoys and private citizens in any shape and form is totally foreign to the teachings and doctrines of Islam. In other words, the philosophy of Islam totally rejects terrorism.

Through the actions of some elements, the western world visualizes a wrong concept of Jihad (Holy War). The word Jihad conjures up the vision of a marching band of religious fanatics with savage beards and fiery eyes, brandishing swords and attacking the infidels.

Jihad in Islamic terminology means to make an effort, to endeavour and to strive in a noble way. Over the centuries this meaning of Jihad has been obliterated or at least diluted. The critical juncture in the Islamic world requires reviving and recapturing the true and pristine meaning of Jihad.

Jihad can be divided into two broad categories. First is Jihad-e-akbar. This is Jihad against one's own person to curb sinful inclinations, i.e., purification of self. This is the most difficult Jihad and hence in terms of rewards and blessings is the highest category of Jihad.

The second is Jihad-e-asghar. This is Jihad of the sword. This is communal Jihad and presupposes certain specific conditions. The Quran speaks of fighting only against those who first attack Muslims and this is the very condition laid down in other verses of the Holy Quran as well. The so-called verse of the sword in the Islamic scripture is often taken out of context as if it inculcates an indiscriminate massacre of all unbelievers. The Quranic words such as kill whatever you find them apply only in cases where the enemy has first attacked Muslims and apply to those unbelievers and enemies who break their oaths and firm agreements. They do not apply to unprovoked wars and battles. To interpret these verses in any other manner would be a travesty of the lofty ideals of Islam. There is not a single instance in the life of the Holy Prophet where he offered the alternative of the sword or Islam to anyone.

The Western media and even some scholars sometimes ignore the distinction between these two aspects of Jihad. It must be remembered that the Holy Quran does not make Jihad, the holy war, in context of an article of faith. The sayings and traditions of the Holy Prophet render it into a formula for active struggle that invariably and incorrectly tended towards a militant expression. Modern day terrorism is contrary to the purview of the real spirit of the Islamic Jihad.

The presentation of Islam as a crude and barbaric religion which gives itself the right to cause unwarranted human and material suffering and destruction under the guise of Divine authority, is not the kind of Islam we find in the Holy Quran and in the precepts of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!)

Among the attributes of God, the Holy Quran mentions that He is the Source of peace and the Bestower of security (59:23). The establishment of peace and maintenance of security must, therefore, be the constant objective of all Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Every pursuit and activity which disturbs peace is severely condemned in Islam. We find specific injunctions in the Holy Quran:

And create not disorder in the earth after it has been set in order.... (7:57; 11:86; 29:37)

Mischief and wickedness are condemned in several other verses and Muslims are commanded to work wholly for peace.

Islam draws attention to factors which tend to disturb or destroy peace and order, and deprecates them. Domination of one group by another in the domestic sphere, or of one people by another in the international sphere is a potent cause of disturbance of peace and is therefore strongly condemned. Economic exploitation of one people or country by another inevitably leads to domination by the exploiters, and develops into a potential threat to peace. The Holy Quran prohibits such exploitation and an economy based on exploitation cannot be beneficial in its consequences, nor can it endure.

Islam visualizes an association of strong and stable states allied together in the pursuance of peace, freedom of conscience and the promotion of human welfare. Treaties or covenants between nations may have to be drawn up which should be done in a straightforward language and should not be evaded or repudiated under the temptation of securing some advantage. In case of difficulties and disputes, it is the duty of Muslims to bring about a peaceful settlement and adjustment.

The Holy Quran teaches that God has sent His revelation to all people from time to time. Many of prophets of the Old Testament are mentioned by name and so is Jesus who with other prophets is honoured and revered by all Muslims. Indeed, the Quran requires belief in the truth of all these prophets. Islam is thus unique and distinct in requiring an affirmation in all prophets wherever they appeared and therefore it seeks to bring about reconciliation between the followers of different faiths and to establish a basis of respect and honour among them. The Quran says:

Surely, those who believe and the Jews and the Christians and the Sabians - whichever party from among these truly believes in ALLAH and the Last Day and does good deeds, shall have their reward with their Lord, and no fear shall come upon then nor shall they grieve (2:63)

The same message is repeated in 5:70. The basic unity of the followers of all faiths is emphatically stressed in the Holy Quran and the creation of discord and disunity by terrorism or otherwise has no place in Islam.

In the domain of international relations, religion and inter-religious relations occupy an important position. Unfortunately, comparatively little attention is paid to this aspect of human relations. It is assumed that religion is a private matter for each individual and should, therefore, have no direct connection with the political, social aspects of life. This assumption is not justified. Islam being an egalitarian religion, is not just a personal faith, but an all-encompassing codes of values and conduct. Islam is and will be a vital factor in human relations and there is a good ground of hope that it might progressively become more effective in promoting unity and accord rather than continue to be required on the part of religious and political leaders to achieve that goal.

I must conclude by saying that whether peace or war, acts of terrorism are not only condemned in Islam but are also pointedly declared alien to the teachings of Islam which in fact means peace through the submission to the Will of God, the Lord of all human beings. Only through conformity to Divine laws can we hope to achieve the ideal of a secure world free of terrorism.

Islam means the religion of peace. A person following Islam will find that he or she is surrounded by noble teachings, the aim of which is to establish peace between man and Allah, the Creator of all; between man and man; and between man and the rest of Allah’s creation.

How does such a religion deal with the issue of terrorism? And what does the word terrorist mean? Dictionaries will define a terrorist as one who systematically uses violence and intimidation to achieve political ends – or one who controls or forces others to do something by violence, fear or threats.

All these definitions are covered by two words in the Holy Qur’an, the sacred book of Islam: Fitnah and Ikrâh.

In the Holy Qur’an, God begins to deal with the issue of terrorism by teaching Muslims never to become terrorists in the first place. Two of the very first verses of our Holy Book say: ‘Al-Fitnatu ashad-du minal qatl’ – meaning that in the sight of Allah, ‘persecution, or making people constantly fear for their lives, is much worse than killing’. And also: ‘Lâ ikrâha fid-dîn’ – ‘There shall be no compulsion in religion’, that is to say, that no one has the right to force others into complying with their demands or compelling others to follow their line of thinking.

Allah Almighty warns the believers again and again that they should never abandon Him, the source of all goodness. Allah Almighty reminds us that it is those who have abandoned Him and thrown away all good, and divested themselves of every shred of human decency, that are the ones who will eventually resort to terrorizing others, forcing them into complying with their demands. The believers are repeatedly reminded that they would lose Allah Almighty’s love and His favors if they ever began to behave in that way.

But Islam does not content itself with these injunctions strongly forbidding Muslims from ever becoming terrorists. It also makes sure that the believers are made into highly moral, excellently behaved people, by inculcating those lofty human values that can turn them into people who sincerely love humankind without distinction of religion, race or social status. Islam no doubt encourages the logical and rational discussion of views with people of all creeds in a calm and dispassionate way, with the only aim that truth prevail over error and falsehood. But it also reminds us that it is error and falsehood as such that are to be hated and detested. The people who unfortunately hold on to error are never to be hated. That is why the motto of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is ‘Love for all, hatred for none.’

In Islam, an amazingly powerful emphasis is laid on developing love for mankind and on the vital importance of showing mercy and sympathy towards every creature of Allah Almighty, including human beings and animals. For indeed, love and true sympathy are the very antidote of terrorism.

It is related by ‘Ayesha, may Allah be pleased with her, the talented wife of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that some desert Arabs came to him one day and asked: ‘Do you kiss your children?’ He answered: ‘Yes.’ They said: ‘We never kiss them.’ The Prophet (sa) said:‘What can I do if your hearts have been stripped of compassion?’ He also said that Allah Almighty has no mercy for him who has no mercy for his fellow beings.

The measure of compassion shown by the Holy Prophet (sa) cannot but amaze anyone who knows how rough and violent was the society into which he had been born. Abu Qatâdah, may Allah be pleased with her, relates that the Messenger of Allah told him: ‘It happens that I stand up to lead the prayer, having in mind to lengthen it. Then I hear the cry of an infant and I shorten the prayer fearing lest I should cause inconvenience to its mother.’

Far from inciting hatred and aggressiveness in its followers, Islam keeps on enjoining kindness and sympathy for all. The Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: ‘Charity is incumbent upon every human limb every day on which the sun rises. To bring about reconciliation between two contestants is charity. Helping a person mount his animal or to load his baggage on to it is charity. A good word is charity. Every step taken toward the mosque for prayer is charity. To remove anything from the street that causes inconvenience is charity.’

He incessantly admonished Muslims to behave well towards their neighbors, saying: ‘That one will not enter Paradise whose neighbor is not safe against his mischief.’

He also declared: ‘By Him in Whose Hands is my life, you will not enter Paradise unless you believe, and you will not truly believe unless you love one another. Shall I tell you something whereby you will love one another? Multiply the greeting of peace among yourselves.’

One day he found a mother bird beating her wings on the ground in distress. He asked his companions: ‘Who has done this?’ They said: ‘We took her young ones out of her nest.’ The Holy Prophet (sa) said: ‘Restore them to her. No mother must be tormented on account of her child.’

On another occasion, he found one of his companions setting fire to an anthill. He immediately told them to put out the fire saying: ‘No one has the right to torment others with fire.’

As Allah Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an that the true believers are: ‘those who suppress their anger and forgive people’, likewise, the Holy Messenger of Allah, Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: ‘Allah is Gentle and loves gentleness in all things. Make things easy and do not make them hard. And cheer people up and do not repel them.’

It is clear that the true believers and all other good, honest people are always on the receiving end of terrorism, never on the delivering end. Whenever such tendencies appear in society by which the peace is being disturbed and people cannot live their lives without fear, Muslims are enjoined to counter them first of all by reasoning with those responsible for the disturbance. The Holy Qur’an says:

Call unto the way of your Lord [that is the way of justice and goodness] with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and argue with them in a way that is best. (Ch.16: v.126)

And the Qur’an repeatedly tells us to seek help from Allah Almighty with patience and prayer. But if reasoning with those people bent on wickedness and praying for them fail to bring about a change in their ways, then Allah Almighty says, again at the end of Chapter 16, verse 127:

‘Then if you desire to punish the oppressors, punish them to the extent you have been wronged.’

Allah Almighty commands the Muslims that when things get out of hand, they should join forces to restore peace by use of reasonable force. They have been enjoined by the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, to join forces if need be with followers of other faiths to do so. Thus, in the famous document known as the Treaty of Medina, The Messenger of Allah declared:

Article 1:
This is the treaty of Muhammad, the Prophet (the Messenger of Allah) between the Believers and Muslims of the Quraish and the people of Yathrib, and between those who follow them and join them in fighting (the common enemy).

Article 2:
And it is that they constitute an Ummah Wâhidah (One Nation) separate from other people.

Article 25:
And also that the Jews of the tribe of ‘Auf constitute an Ummah Wâhidah with the Believers - even though the Jews will follow their own religion and the Muslims will follow their own - and this will include both their friends and themselves. (Quoted from Reuben Levy in ‘Sociology of Islam, part I, pages 279-282)

Here, all the inhabitants of the city of Yathrib, or Medina, were called upon to join in fighting the forces that were terrorizing the citizens.

Muslims have been made to promise that they will help defend the followers of other faiths from unjust and cruel attacks as well. For example, in his charter for all time to come addressed to all Christians living as citizens under Muslim rule, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, states:

I promise that any monk or wayfarer who will seek my help on the mountains, in forests, deserts or habitations, or in places of worship, I will repel his enemies with my friends and helpers, with all my relatives and with all those w ho profess to follow me and will defend them, because they are my covenant. And I will defend the covenanted against the persecution, injury and embarrassment of their enemies in lieu of the poll tax they have promised to pay. If they prefer to defend their properties and persons themselves, they will be allowed to do so and will not be put to any inconvenience on that account.

No bishop will be expelled from his bishopric, no monk from his monastery, no priest from his place of worship, and no pilgrim will be detained in his pilgrimage. None of their churches and other places of worship will be desolated or destroyed or demolished. No material of their churches will be used to build mosques or houses for the Muslims; any Muslim doing so will be regarded as recalcitrant to Allah and His Prophet. Monks and Bishops will be subject to no tax or indemnity whether they live in forests or on rivers, in the East or in the West, in the North or in the South. I give them my word of honor. They are on my promise and covenant and will enjoy perfect immunity from all sorts of inconveniences. Every help shall be given them in the repair of their churches. They shall be absolved of wearing arms. They shall be protected by the Muslims. Let this document not be disobeyed till Judgment Day.” (Quoted from Balâdhar)

In Islam, every effort is thus made to protect the peace of not only the Muslims, but also of the followers of other faiths. Allah Almighty says:

And if Allah did not defend some men by means of others, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques wherein the name of Allah is oft remembered. (Ch.22: v.41)

However, Muslims have been warned by the Holy Founder of Islam, Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that when they enter the territory of those who have been terrorizing and harshly persecuting them, they should not lose all sense of perspective and justice, and be tempted to start acting savagely, like the terrorists themselves. The worst crime of ungratefulness would be that committed by a people who, having forgotten that they had just been subjected to terrible cruelties, start meting out the same, if not worse, cruelties to others. The Prophet ordered:

‘You will meet those who remember Almighty Allah in their houses of worship. Have no dispute with them, and give no trouble to them. In the enemy country, do not kill any women or children, or the blind, or the old. Do not pull down any tree; nor pull down any building.’ (Quoted from Halbiyyah, Vol.3).

So the only Jihad permitted in Islam is the war of the oppressed against the oppressor, the war waged to protect the peace of all people irrespective of their religion or creed. Tactics used today such as suicide bombing, etc. are absolutely out of the question for true followers of Islam. Allah Almighty says:

And kill not your own selves. Surely Allah is Merciful to you. (Ch.4: v. 30)

…and cast not yourselves into ruin with your own hands… (Ch.2: v.196)

Islam strictly forbids the killing of innocent, non-aggressive people:…no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors. (Ch.2: v.194)

These three verses alone are sufficient to prevent Muslims from crashing airplanes into buildings, or from sending suicide bombers to blow up innocent civilians.

Once the evildoers have ceased misbehaving and have been justly punished for their crimes, then Allah Almighty says:

And fight them until there is no more persecution, and religion is freely professed for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors. (Ch.2: v.194)

To sum up, Islam advocates three steps against terrorism:

1. To give an excellent moral upbringing to all Muslims, so that they become upright, just, moral, kind and loving people, thereby ensuring that they never disrupt the peace of others.
2. Whenever the peace is disrupted, to reason and argue with the evildoers, and sincerely pray for them, to make them change their ways.
3. If all reasoning fails, then to join forces with all good people to combat the mischief-mongers until peace has been restored, but always keeping the dictates of justice in view.

It is our belief that not only Islam, but no true religion, whatever its name, can sanction violence and bloodshed of innocent men, women and children in the name of Allah Almighty. Terrorists may use religious or political labels, but no one should be deceived by their wily ways and treacherous guiles. They have nothing to do with religion. They are the enemies of peace. They must be combated at every level as advocated by Islam, the religion of peace.

... The question ... arises - Can it ever be right to fight for a faith? Let us, therefore, turn to this question.

The teaching of religion on the subject of war takes different forms... Moses is commanded to enter the land of Canaan by force, to defeat its population and to settle his own people in it (Deut. 20:10-18). In spite of this teaching in the Book of Moses, and in spite of its reinforcement by practical example of the Prophets Joshua, David and others, Jews and Christians continue to hold their Prophets in reverence and to regard their books as the Books of God.

At the end of the Mosaic tradition, we had Jesus who taught;

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also (Matthew 5-39).

Christians have often cited this teaching of Jesus and argued that Jesus preached against war. But in the New Testament, we have passages which purport to teach quite the opposite. One passage, for instance, says:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34).

And another passage says:

Then said he unto them. But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one (Luke 22:36).

Of the three verses the last two contradict the first. If Jesus came for war, why did he teach about turning the other cheek? It seems we have either to admit a contradiction in the New Testament, or we have to explain one of the contradictory teachings in a suitable manner. We are not concerned here with the question whether turning the other cheek can ever be practicable. We are concerned only to point out that, throughout their long history, no Christian people have ever hesitated to make war. When Christians first attained to power in Rome, they took part in wars both defensive and aggressive. They are dominant powers in the world today, and they continue to take part in wars both defensive and aggressive. Only now the side which wins is canonized by the rest of the Christian world. Their victory is said to be the victory of Christian civilization. Christian civilization has come to mean whatever tends to be dominant and successful. When two Christian powers go to war, each claims to be the protector of Christian ideals. The power which wins is canonized as the true Christian power. It is true, however, that from the time of Jesus to our time, Christendom has been involved-and indications are that it will continue to remain involved-in war. The practical verdict of the Christian peoples, therefore, is that war is the real teaching of the New Testament, and that turning the other cheek was either an opportunist teaching dictated by the helplessness of early Christians, or it is meant to apply only to individuals, not to States and peoples.

Secondly, even if we assume that Jesus taught peace and not war, it does not follow that those who do not act upon this teaching are not holy and honored. For Christendom has ever revered exponents of war such as Moses, Joshua and David. Not only this, the Church itself has canonized national heroes who suffered in wars. They were made saints by the Popes.

THE QURAN ON WAR AND PEACE

The teaching of Islam is different from both these teachings. It strikes a mean between the two. Islam does not teach aggression as did Moses. Nor does it, like present-day (and presumably corrupt) Christianity, preach a contradiction. It does not ask us to turn the other cheek and at the same time to sell our clothes to buy a sword. The teaching of Islam fits into the natural instincts of man, and promotes peace in the only possible way.

Islam forbids aggression, but it urges us to fight if failure to fight jeopardizes peace and promotes war. If failure to fight means the extirpation of free belief and of the search of truth, it is our duty to fight. This is the teaching on which peace can ultimately be built, and this is the teaching on which the Prophet based his own policies and his practice. The Prophet suffered continuously and consistently at Mecca but did not fight the aggression of which he was an innocent victim. When he escaped to Medina, the enemy was out to extirpate Islam; it was, therefore, necessary to fight the enemy in defense of truth and freedom of belief.

We quote below the passages in the Quran which bear on the subject of war.

(1) In 22:40-42 we have:

Permission to fight is given to those against whom war is made, because they have been wronged-and Allah indeed has power to help them-Those who have been driven out from their homes unjustly only because they said, "Our Lord is Allah"-And if Allah did not repel some men by means of others, there would surely have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft commemorated. And Allah will surely help one who helps Him. Allah is indeed Powerful, Mighty.-Those who, if We establish them in the earth, will observe Prayer and pay the Zakat and enjoin good and forbid evil. And with Allah rests the final issue of all affairs.

The verse purports to say that permission to fight is given to the victims of aggression. God is well able to help the victims-those who have been driven out of their homes because of their beliefs. The permission is wise because, if God were not to repel the cruel with the help of the righteous, there would be no freedom of faith and worship in the world. God must help those who help to establish freedom of worship. It follows that fighting is permitted when a people have suffered long from wanton aggression-when the aggressor has had no cause for aggression and he seeks to interfere with the religion of his victim. The duty of the victim, if and when he attains to power, is to establish religious freedom and to protect all religions and all religious places. His power is to be used not for his own glorification, but for the care of the poor, the progress of the country and the general promotion of peace. This teaching is as unexceptionable as it is clear and precise. It proclaims the fact that early Muslims took to war because they were constrained to do so. Aggressive wars were forbidden by Islam. Muslims are promised political power, but are warned that this power must be used not for self-aggrandizement, but for the amelioration of the poor and the promotion of peace and progress.

(2) In (2:191-194) we have:

And fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress. Surely, Allah loves not transgressors. And kill them wherever you meet them and drive them out from where they have driven you out; for persecution is worse than killing. And fight them not in, and near, the Sacred Mosque until they fight you, then fight them: such is the requital for the disbelievers. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is professed for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors.

Fighting is to be for the sake of God, not for our own sake or out of anger or aggrandizement, and even fighting is to be free from excesses, for excesses are displeasing to God. Fighting is between parties of combatants. Assaults on individuals are forbidden. Aggression against a religion is to be met by active resistance, for such aggression is worse than bloodshed. Muslims are not to fight near the Sacred Mosque, unless an attack is first made by the enemy. Fighting near the Sacred Mosque interferes with the public right of pilgrimage. But if the enemy attacks, Muslims are free to reply, this being the just reward of aggression. But if the enemy desists, Muslims must desist also, and forgive and forget the past. Fighting is to continue so long as religious persecution lasts and religious freedom is not established. Religion is for God. The use of force or pressure in religion is wrong. If the Kafirs desist from it and make religion free, Muslims are to desist from fighting the Kafirs. Arms are to be taken up against those who commit excesses. When excesses cease, fighting must cease also.

Categorically, we may say, the verses teach the following rules:

1. War is to be resorted to only for the sake of God and not for the sake of any selfish motives, not for aggrandizement or for the advancement of any other interests.

2. We can go to war only against one who attacks us first.

3. We can fight only those who fight against us. We cannot fight against those who take no part in warfare.

4. Even after the enemy has initiated the attack, it is our duty to keep warfare within limits. To extend the war, either territorially or in respect of weapons used, is wrong.

5. We are to fight only a regular army charged by the enemy to fight on his side. We are not to fight others on the enemy side.

6. In warfare immunity is to be afforded to all religious rites and observances. If the enemy spares the places where religious ceremonies are held, then Muslims also must desist from fighting in such places.

7. If the enemy uses a place of worship as a base for attack, then Muslims may return the attack. No blame will attach to them if they do so. No fighting is allowed even in the neighborhood of religious places. To attack religious places and to destroy them or to do any kind of harm to them is absolutely forbidden. A religious place used as a base of operations may invite a counter-attack. The responsibility for any harm done to the place will then rest with the enemy, not with Muslims.

8. If the enemy realizes the danger and the mistake of using a religious place as a base, and changes the battle-front, then Muslims must conform to the change. The fact that the enemy started the attack from a religious place is not to be used as an excuse for attacking that place. Out of reverence Muslims must change their battle-front as soon as the enemy does so.

9. Fighting is to continue only so long as interference with religion and religious freedom lasts. When religion becomes free and interference with it is no longer permitted and the enemy declares and begins to act accordingly, then there is to be no war, even if it is the enemy who starts it.

(3) In 8:39-41 we have:

Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist, that which is past will be forgiven them; and if they return thereto, then verily the example of the former people has already gone before them. And fight them until there is no persecution and religion is wholly for Allah. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Watchful of what they do. And if they turn their backs, then know that Allah is your Protector. What an excellent Protector and what an excellent Helper.

That is to say, wars have been forced upon Muslims. But if the enemy desists, it is the duty of Muslims to desist also, and forgive the past. But if the enemy does not desist and attacks Muslims again and again, then he should remember the fate of the enemies of earlier Prophets. Muslims are to fight, while religious persecution lasts, and so long as religion is not for God and interference in religious matters is not abandoned. When the aggressor desists, Muslims are to desist also. They are not to continue the war because the enemy believes in a false religion. The value of beliefs and actions is well known to God and He will reward them as He pleases. Muslims have no right to meddle with another people's religion even if that religion seems to them to be false. If after an offer of peace the enemy continues to make war, then Muslims may be sure of victory even though their numbers are small. For God will help them and who can help better than God?

These verses were revealed in connection with the Battle of Badr. This battle was the first regular fight between Muslims and disbelievers. In it Muslims were the victims of unprovoked aggression. The enemy had chosen to disturb the peace of Medina and of the territory around. In spite of this, victory went to the Muslims and important leaders of the enemy were killed. To retaliate against such unprovoked aggression seems natural, just and necessary. Yet Muslims are taught to stop fighting as soon as the enemy ceases it. All that the enemy is required to concede is freedom of belief and worship.

(4) In 8:62-63 we have:

And if they incline towards peace, incline thou also towards it, and put thy trust in Allah. Surely, it is He Who is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. And if they intend to deceive thee, then surely Allah is sufficient for thee. He it is Who has strengthened thee with His help and with the believers.

That is to say, if in the course of a battle the disbelievers at any time incline towards peace, Muslims are to accept the offer at once and to make peace. Muslims are to do so even at the risk of being deceived. They are to put their trust in God. Cheating will not avail against Muslims, who rely on the help of God. Their victories are due not to themselves but to God. In the darkest and most difficult times, God has stood by the Prophet and his followers. So will He stand by them against cheats. An offer of peace is to be accepted. It is not to be rejected on the plea that it may only be a ruse with which the enemy seeks to gain time for a fresh attack.

The stress on peace in the verses is not without significance. It anticipates the peace which the Prophet signed at Hudaibiya. The Prophet is warned that a time will come when the enemy will sue for peace. The offer is not to be turned down on the ground that the enemy was the aggressor and had committed excesses, or that he cannot be trusted. The straight path inculcated by Islam requires a Muslim to accept an offer of peace. Both piety and policy make the acceptance desirable.

(5) In 4:95 we have:

O ye who believe! when you go forth in the cause of Allah, make proper investigation and say not to anyone who greets you with the greeting of peace, "Thou art not a believer." You seek the goods of this life, but with Allah are good things in plenty. Such were you before this, but Allah conferred His favor on you; so do make proper investigation. Surely, Allah is well aware of what you do.

That is to say, when Muslims go out for war, they are to make sure that the unreasonableness of war has been explained to the enemy and that he still wants war. Even so, if a proposal of peace is received from an individual or a group, Muslims are not to turn it down on the plea that it is not honest. If Muslims turn down proposals of peace, they will not be fighting for God, but for self-aggrandizement and worldly gain. Just as religion comes from God, worldly gain and glory also come from Him. Killing is not to be the aim. One whom we wish to kill today may be guided tomorrow. Could Muslims have become Muslims if they had not been spared? Muslims are to abstain from killing because lives spared may turn out to be lives guided. God is well aware of what men do and to what ends and with what motives they do it.

The verse teaches that even after war has begun, it is the duty of Muslims to satisfy themselves that the enemy is bent upon aggression. It often happens that no aggression is intended but that out of excitement and fear the enemy has started preparations for war. Unless Muslims are satisfied that an aggressive attack has been planned by the enemy, they are not to go to war. If it turns out, or if the enemy claims, that his preparations are for self-defense, Muslims are to accept the claim and desist from war. They are not to argue that the enemy preparations point to nothing but aggression; maybe he intended aggression, but his intention has changed. Are not intentions and motives continually changing? Did not enemies of Islam become friends?

(6) On the inviolability of treaties the Quran says clearly:

Excepting those of the idolaters with whom you have entered into a treaty and who have not subsequently failed you in anything nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill to these the treaty you have made with them till their term. Surely, Allah loves those who are righteous (9:4).

Pagans, who enter into a pact with Muslims, keep the pact and do not help the enemy against Muslims, are to have reciprocal treatment from Muslims. Piety requires that Muslims should fulfill their part of a pact in the letter as well as the spirit.

(7) Of an enemy at war with Muslims who wishes to study the Message of Islam, the Quran orders:

And if anyone of the idolaters ask protection of thee, grant him protection, so that he may hear the word of Allah: then convey him to his place of security. That is because they are a people who have no knowledge (9:6).

That is to say, if any of those at war with Muslims seek refuge with Muslims in order to study Islam and ponder over its Message, they are to have refuge with Muslims for such time as may be reasonably necessary for such a purpose.

(8) Of prisoners of war, the Quran teaches:

It does not behoove a Prophet that he should have captives until he engages in a regular fighting in the land. You desire the goods of the world, while Allah desires for you the Hereafter. And Allah is Mighty, Wise (8:68).

That is to say, it does not become a Prophet to make prisoners of his enemy save as a result of regular war involving much bloodshed. The system of making prisoners of enemy tribes without war and bloodshed practiced until-and even after-the advent of Islam, is here made unlawful. Prisoners can be taken only from combatants and after a battle.

(9) Rules for the release of prisoners are also laid down. Thus we have:

Then afterwards either release them as a favor or by taking ransom-until the war lays down its burdens (47:5).

The best thing, according to Islam, is to let off prisoners without asking for ransom. As this is not always possible, release by ransom is also provided for.

(10) There is provision for prisoners of war who are unable themselves to pay, and who have none who can or will pay, for their release. Often, relations are able to pay, but do not, because they prefer to let their relations remain prisoners-possibly with the intention of misappropriating their property in their absence. This provision is contained in the Quran:

And such as desire a deed of manumission from among those whom your right hands possess, write it for them, if you know any good in them; and give them out of the wealth of Allah which He has bestowed upon You (24:34).

That is, those who do not deserve to be released without ransom but who have no one to pay ransom for them-if they still ask for their freedom-can obtain it by signing an undertaking that, if allowed to work and earn, they will pay their ransom. They are to be allowed to do so, however, only if their competence to work and earn is reasonably certain. If their competence is proved, they should even have financial help from Muslims in their effort to work and earn. Individual Muslims who can afford to do so should pay; or, public subscription should be raised to put these unfortunates on their feet.

The passages from the Quran which we have quoted above contain the teaching of Islam on the subject of war and peace. They tell us in what circumstances, according to Islam, is it right to go to war and what limits have to be observed by Muslims when they make war.

THE PROPHET'S PRECEPTS ABOUT WAR

Muslim teaching, however, does not consist only of precepts laid down in the Quran. It also includes the precepts and example of the Prophet. What he did or what he taught in concrete situations is also an essential part of the Islamic teaching. We append here some sayings of the Prophet on the subject of war and peace.

1. Muslims are forbidden altogether to mutilate the dead (Muslim).

2. Muslims are forbidden to resort to cheating (Muslim).

3. Children are not to be killed, nor women (Muslim).

4. Priests and religious functionaries and religious leaders are not to be interfered with (Ôaªavi).

5. The old and decrepit and women and children are not to be killed. The possibility of peace should always be kept in view (Abu Dawud).

6. When Muslims enter enemy territory, they should not strike terror into the general population. They should permit no ill-treatment of common folk (Muslim).

7. A Muslim army should not camp in a place where it causes inconvenience to the general public. When it marches it should take care not to block the road nor cause discomfort to other wayfarers.

8. No disfigurement of face is to be permitted (Bukhari and Muslim).

9. The least possible losses should be inflicted upon the enemy (Abu Dawud).

10. When prisoners of war are put under guard, those closely related should be placed together (Abu Dawud).

11. Prisoners should live in comfort. Muslims should care more for the comfort of their prisoners than for their own (Tirmidhi).

12. Emissaries and delegates from other countries should be held in great respect. Any mistakes or discourtesies they commit should be ignored (Abu Dawud, Kitab al-Jihad).

13. If a Muslim commits the sin of ill-treating a prisoner of war, atonement is to be made by releasing the prisoner without ransom.

14. When a Muslim takes charge of a prisoner of war, the latter is to be fed and clothed in the same way as the Muslim himself (Bukhari).

The Holy Prophet was so insistent on these rules for a fighting army that he declared that whoever did not observe these rules, would fight not for God but for his own mean self (Abu Dawud).

Abu Bakr, the First Khalifa of Islam, supplemented these commands of the Prophet by some of his own. One of these commands appended here also constitutes part of the Muslim teaching:

15. Public buildings and fruit-bearing trees (and food crops) are not to be damaged (Mu'aÕÕa).

From the sayings of the Prophet and the commands of the First Khalifa of Islam it is evident that Islam has instituted steps which have the effect of preventing or stopping a war or reducing its evil. As we have said before, the principles which Islam teaches are not pious precepts only; they have their practical illustration in the example of the Prophet and the early Khalifas of Islam. As all the world knows, the Prophet not only taught these principles; he practiced them and insisted on their observance.

Turning to our own time we must say that no other teaching seems able to solve the problem of war and peace. The teaching of Moses is far from our conceptions of justice and fair play. Nor is it possible to act upon that teaching today. The teaching of Jesus is impracticable and has ever been so. Never in their history have Christians tried to put this teaching into practice. Only the teaching of Islam is practicable; one which has been both preached and practiced by its exponents, and the practice of which can create and maintain peace in the world.

In our time, Mr. Gandhi apparently taught that even when war is forced on us we should not go to war. We should not fight. But this teaching has not been put into practice at any time in the history of the world. It has never been put in the crucible and tested. It is impossible; therefore, to say what value this teaching may have in terms of war and peace. Mr. Gandhi lived long enough to see the Indian Congress attain to political independence. Yet the Congress Government has not disbanded either the army or the other armed forces of India. It is only making plans for their Indianization. It also has plans for the reinstatement of those Indian officers who constituted themselves into the Indian National Army (and who were dismissed by the British authorities) during the Japanese attack on Burma and India in the last stages of the recent World War. Mr. Gandhi has himself, on many occasions, raised his voice in extenuation of crimes of violence, and urged the release of those who committed such crimes. This shows at least that Mr. Gandhi's teaching cannot be put into practice and that Mr. Gandhi knows it as well as all his followers. No practical example at least has been offered to show the world how non-violence can be applied when armed disputes arise between nation and nation and State and State, or how non-violence can prevent or stop a war. To preach a method of stopping wars, but never to be able to afford a practical illustration of that method indicates that the method is impracticable. It would, therefore, seem that human experience and human wisdom point to only one method of preventing or stopping war; and that method was taught and practiced by the Prophet of Islam.

Mars,

I doubt anyone argues that Islam can't be interpreted as a religion of peace. But like the bible, it contains contradictions, and due to those contradictions, Islam can also be interpreted as a religion of violence, specifically so, given it's founder's (the prophet's) own actions - and that is where all the protestations about it being a religion of peace fall down.

Further, whether moderate muslims like it or not, a very significant percentage of muslims interpret the koran in a fundamental way. Estimates put 'radicals' (a misnomer for fundamentalists) at 10% - which is significant when the Islamic population is over 1 billion people.

It also does seem that many muslims are sympathetic to Al Qeida - one survey susuggests 50%

It also seems that Islam is involved in 80% of the worlds conflicts, and that in many cases, it is the religion that is the nexus/driving force separating the two sides.

The call in the original posted article is not unusual, should one pay attention. Nor are calls by muslim leaders in western countries to subjugate people to Sharia law.

You also avoided the fact that in Islamic countries, non muslims are second class citizens. Even here in Australia, Imams admit that should Australia become a muslim nations, non muslims would be treated as second class.

Religious justifications for good are nice - but religious justifications cut both ways - for both good and bad; and so it is better to look at the reality of the religion than the warm fuzzy stuff they sprout, which can be countermanded to evil (killing for religion is evil) by other verses in the books.

Talk, I think maybe you have become distracted from the point of my original post, and it's included article - which your replies miss the context of.

Well Obviously you havent read my posts.

and as for the surveys you relate to, luckily, nothing goes buy in this world without references. I'll be glad to know where those false allegations originated.

Technically true if you rephrased it to 'obviously you haven't read all of my posts'.

As I said, I don't deny that Islam can be interpreted as a religion of peace, but while the side of peace only have words from some parts of the Koran, the call to violence has both word and deed of it's founder, the prophet, so there is little moderate Muslims can ever do to convince fundamentalist/extremists that violence is wrong.

This makes it, whether you like it or not, a religion of violence.

Violence of course, is only one problem with Islam, which is also a religion of domination, using any means possible to impose it's domination, whether it be sharia law, sharia law courts, social/legal systems rendering non muslims as 2nd class citizens, or violence.

Hah, like I read things over the years and kept their references just so I could show you in this blog :>

Of course, having read them - articles the result of expert opinion or survey (both of which are subject to flaws), you are welcome to not take my word, or even search for counter claims.