MUHAMMAD

This quotation is often used to illustrate the "Muslim propensity to violence". However, the context of the quotation was a historical circumstance whereby Muhammad's followers were endangered by others and the fighting was of a defensive nature. However, Islam is also a religion requiring believers to spread the religion. So, if there were people or countries or tribes that resisted conversion, the religion was interpreted by many Muslims as being under attack. Therefore violence was justified. In modern times, some religious leaders saw modernism and The West as a danger to Islam and it's tradition, therefore this and other passages of the Koran are often used to justify the terrorism that became so prevalent.

This quotation shows The Prophet relaying a message from Allah. This quotation is often used to explain the reason that Islamic nations often support each other regardless of interests, legality, or morality of the position. If the other Muslim nation is a friend of Allah’s, and one opposes the other Islamic nation, then one is not only standing against Allah’s “friend” but Allah himself might make war on you for standing against his friend. So for Islamic nations like Turkey and Pakistan to even be supportive of anti-terrorist activities against Islamic terrorists is a politically, culturally and religiously very difficult thing to do because fundamentalists will cite this quotation and warn that the policy may well be “standing in enmity” against one of Allah’s friends. For most Islamic nations, their religious culture produces a basic instinct to support other Islamic nations against heretics (the Judeo-Christian West or the Hindu-Buddhist East) lest Allah declare war on them.

It is this verse that for some Muslims justifies terrorism against non-Muslims. See {584354} for a specific example. There are similar provisions in the Old Testament which a few extremely conservative Jews and Christians have used to advocate for blasphemy being a capital crime. Note that if an unbeliever repents and becomes a Muslim, he should be spared.

While critics of Islam cite this sura to show how absurd the Koran can be and contradicts what is known about the Earth’s orbit, few sophisticated, moderate Muslims believe this. However, even in the United States there are many Christians and Orthodox Jews who not only deny Evolution but also believe the Earth is 6000 years old. The basic difference is that in Islamic countries publicly critiquing such anti-scientific theological statements is rare and an individual who publicly argues against the Koran taken literally is often in danger from state or private retribution. In the West the conflict between the Bible and known science is not only publicly commented upon but in a somewhat derisive way. However, consider this: Islam is about 1500 years old. When Christianity was the same age, Galileo was tried and convicted by the Catholic Church for denying this very statement. Perhaps in another 700 years Muslims will look back with embarrassment on this as most of Christianity does.

Essentially such a rigid conviction of unbelievers was common with both Protestants and Catholics in the middle of the second millennium, but Christian theology evolved and forgiveness and repentance became major factors. Islam did not so modernize so even in the 21st century a disbeliever deserved nothing from Muslims because Allah would never forgive them and they would be consigned to hell. So this Sura and {584363} made fundamentalist Muslim terrorists particularly willing to kill non-believers.

These suras are ones that for some fundamentalist extremists justified the killing of Iraqis Muslims who worked with the British, Americans or other Coalition forces in the Iraq war or even politicians who cooperated with the coalition.

Christian sentiments like this were common during The Crusades where God would cause Christianity to prevail. However, with the Reformation, the enlightenment, the industrial revolution, and modernity, most Christians became more tolerant of other religions and accepting of the fact that there are other religions, which while not valid, would co-exist with Christianity. Islam backward and left out of the forces that modernized Christian nations entered the 21st century with large numbers of Muslims who believe in the literal truth of this sura and its desirability and their personal duty to help make it happen.

If some Islamic cleric declares a war or dispute to be an attack on Islam, the penalty is indeed severe for those Muslims who do not join the fight. In some Islamic lands, unbelievers are put to death. Note that the children become the Islamic society’s hostages for the behavior of the father.

This sura illustrates why peace treaties between Islamic and non Islamic countries are difficult to negotiate and enforce. For some fundamentalist Muslims, even making a peace treaty with Israel would constitute a transgression of the word of God. Nonetheless, the first treaty that the United States ever made was with a Muslim nation—Tripoli.

This sura is used by fundamentalist Islamic regimes to justify religious persecution and prohibit any public worship other than Islam. Jews and Christians went through this stage and there are still a few fundamentalist extremists who would deny freedom of religion if they could. While the percentage is small, those in Islamic nations are a much larger proportion of the whole.

This sura is interpreted by some Islamic fundamentalists as absolution for the killing of a non-Muslim by a Muslim. It was Allah who did it. In a greater sense, critics of Islam observe that many Muslims and Islamic nations have a double standard of responsibility for crimes. If the victims are Muslims, the normal standards of morality hold; but if a non-believer there can be no crime. Terrorism, torture, beheading, mass murder can all be done with a clean conscience if a Muslim takes this interpretation of this sura. Many Muslims however take an opposite point of view. These people do not have the concept of fatalism and lack of free will that others believe. There is a parallel to this problem in Judeo Christian countries although it is less common statistically. But the murder of physicians who perform abortions, and the Jewish radical fundamentalist who killed innocent Arabs at worship are examples of people who viewed themselves as instruments of God in their heinous activities.

The implication of this sura is that it is permissible to kill non-Muslims but not Muslims. The same is true of slavery. Another prescription of this sura is that a Muslim should never kill another Muslim, so while this sura is very discriminatory and in that sense reprehensible, it does call into question the Islamic terrorist practice of the late 20th and early 21st century of killing fellow Muslims who might vote, serve in an official role or cooperate with non-believers. And it definitely to the Western mind prohibits the kind of Islamic sectarian violent practice of Sunni Muslims and Shiite Muslims torturing and butchering each other—a practice that has continued since the two groups fought over who was the rightful successor to Muhammad. The religious rationale for that murderous behavior is that each Islamic group sees the other as apostate and therefore no longer real Muslims.

While moderate Muslims interpret this sura as meaning that theologically, a belief in the divinity of Christ is inconsistent to Islam, extreme fundamentalists take this to indicate that Christians are heretics and should be executed in accordance with Sharia – Islamic Law.

This sura is interpreted in two ways. For many modern Muslims it means that in discussions and debates on religion with non-Muslims, do not back off, and if you do it is a religious transgression. Defend the faith. For the fundamentalists and extremists, they interpret the same sura in physical warlike terms. So if there is a fight or battle with disbelievers, retreating from the battlefield is not only cowardice and perhaps a crime under military regulations as it is in the West, but it is in Christian terms a mortal sin for which there one will go to hell. So the most religious of Muslims will fight to the death using this sura as their guidance. On the other hand, Muhammad himself as the military and civil leader of Islam made strategic retreats. In the history of almost all warfare between the West and Muslims—especially the Arabs—courage on the battlefield has been lacking and the Israelis, British, French, Americans, and Hindus of India all observe this military weakness and accounting for this is built into their military doctrine.

The Islamic Holy Book even recommends against friendships with Christians and Jews. See {584381}.

The Koran is even more discriminatory regarding Jewish & Christian clerics: {584380}.

For many extremists Muslims, this sura calls for the torture or killing of the enemies of Islam. For the more moderate Muslims, the penalty of opposing Islam should be expulsion or banishment. The further modern complication of this sura is the definition of “making war with Allah.” To some extremists, it is writing or publishing anything contrary to their view of Islam; it is occupying any Islamic nation or warring with that nation even though the basis of the war might have nothing to do with religion; it is bringing a Bible into an Islamic nations; it is allowing alcohol to be sold and served; it is opposing their discriminatory customs and laws; it is pressuring them not to stone adulteresses.