Dear Foxy..... thanx for that contribution. I'm a bit confused though.

I didn't expect you to take up that challenge, I know ur usually good for a serious discussion, but it's the other folk who seem reluctant to engage on real issues.

I think I undersand your approach there. You used Surah 2 to show how Muslims should conduct themselves during times of being attacked?

The point I'm asking about though, is not surah 2 but surah 9 which is later.

This is important regarding understanding Islam..the chronology.
You see.. often you will find 'milder' statements such as in Surah 2 and 'bolder' ones in later passages.
We need to know the actual historical background of the particular Surah in order to understand it.

Regarding 9, it was a completely different real world situation from 2
If you like, you could read a Muslim background commentary here.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau9.html

Then there would be a better basis for discussion.

blessings.

I'm not going to hear more about these fairies am I?

Bugsy...I'm treating_your_contemptable_posts_as_they_deserve :)

Dear Foxy.. referring again to your last post.

<<And why go to Surah 9. Why not start with the
verses 2.190-2.194
The Battle of Badr. Which were the first instructions
from God to Muslims to prepare themselves for
fighting.>>

In that, you asked a question: "why surah 9, not surah 2?" the reasons are quite sound.

Primarily it is the chronology. Later Surahs, if different from earlier are said to 'abrogate' the ealier.
Secondly, in Surah 2 the Muslim community was very weak and the whole of the non Muslim Arabian peninsula were out to get them. (Pretty much as you explained)
Also, that is reflected in this commentary at point 3
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau2.html (please look at this)

So..yes, Surah 2 was about 'survival' but surah 9, was not about survival it was about absolutely imposing the rule of Islam on weaker groups and of annihilating all who did not comply. 9:4 and 9:5 show a very different Mohammad.

Yes...he said not to harm ONLY those who (in his view) had not supported anyone against the Muslims while their treaties were valid.

BUT..and it's an important but, after the cessation of those treaties and the end of any holy month, they were to be exterminated wholesale.
This did not depend on the absense of malice during the treaty period, it depended on one thing..'that they were idolaters'.

This was a very strong Mohammad giving an ultimatum of extinction to weaker pockets of non compliance with his rule.

The final important point, which I hope is not lost on you, is.. don't you notice a dramatic contrast between Jesus and Mohammad here?
According to Mohammad "Allah told us to fight" according to Jesus "Love your enemies" and indeed the Christians did not 'fight' the Romans, but in the end the Gospel (not an army) triumphed over Rome.

If a movement is truly of God...does it need to 'fight' to establish God's rule? Is earthly political rule what Jesus had in mind?

"Where 2 or 3 are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst of them" :)

Hey, you're the one who mentioned fairies. If they make people act nicely, then I thought they may be worth hearing about.

If however, you think that a belief in supernatural entities is silly, then I can fully understand that as well.

Dear Polycarp,

I keep trying to get through to you.
I keep trying to understand you because
I know that deep down you are a good man.

But, you don't seem to realize that by adding
further to unnecessary, bitter divisions
between people, and making them deadly
religious enemies, you make a common future
for humankind an extremely difficult project
to bring to fruition.

All I can hope to do is again point
out that the vast majority of modern mainstream
Christians, Jews, and Muslims seek a better life
on earth, rather than seeking it in heaven.

The religiously minded modern person is not a
"card-carrying" fundamentalist. The latter are a
tiny minority. Of whatever faith, any psychologist
would be likely to declare them to be of unsound
mind.

There is enough hatred in the world, we don't need
to actively add to it. We don't need to preach
religious hatred against others. We need voices of
reason and sanity.

Humanity cannot afford to have fundamentalists with
their fingers on the nuclear war button.

The world is in a sad state today.

We need to have reasoned discussions, rather than
arguments of, "Your God is Evil..."

Think about what you're doing.

Dear Foxy
that response surprised me, (in one sense) -I know you are a warm hearted person and detest the idea of 'us/them' in personal, racial or religious affairs, so in that sense I understand you pulling back a bit from facing the actual issue in your last post.

Here is how our posts went for the past few.

I requested people examine a particular (Chronologically recent) surah of the Quran. I raised certain specific questions abou it.

Then... you responded with a 'Why don't I look at the historical context' question, (when in fact I did.. it was just a later context than the surah you offered -being the 2nd)

Why would you offer one which tends to support your personality, yet reject one which is legitimate in terms of the real or at least fuller picture?

It is not legitimate to allow the ideas of Surah 2 to dominate those of Surah 9.. quite the reverse, based on chronology.

Surah 9 establishes the approach of the State founded by Mohammad, toward non Muslims ... at least of that time. They were not a threat militarily as by that time most of the Arabian peninsula had been subdued by his armies.

So we must (yes.. sadly, we must) face the question about 'why' did he treat unbelievers then..as the Quran and history show he did, and..
what can we draw from this about the man, his faith, and how this might relate to us under similar circumstances.

The other question directly bearing on that is his "example".

I never have to defend our Lord on issues like this, because he was a "a lamb without spot" He gave himself sacrificially for us, for our sin and for our salvation.

Remember.. the topic is "Beliefs".....and "Behavior"

One follows the other. This is a place to safely thrash out these ideas at the 'idea' level. I don't think there will be anything like a 'Dreyfus case' world polarization over my woffle here :) Golly...there are only about 11 of us writing.

Bugsy...go play with ur train set. (or.. grow up)