Friday, 11 March 2016

Reading the Koran - Sura 2 Versus 189 -196

Recently, our readings of the Koran has dealt with the Hajj and Ramadan. Well, this week is no different as we learn about the appropriateness of violence. Yes, apparently in the religion of peace it is at times appropriate to be violent. This reading also contains for me four versus that should automatically disqualify the Koran for making any coherent sense. In fact anyone with a semblance of logic will at the end of these four versus be scratching their head and saying WTF!?!

No before we get to the violence I thought I would highlight one of those silly laws that only religion can give you.
It is not piety that you come into houses from their rear; rather piety is [personified by] one who is Godwary, and come into houses from their doors
That's right in Islam you are not allowed to use the back door to your house when entering.

Now the insanity of versus 190 -193, well it starts of well in 190 as it says that one should only fight back when assaulted or attacked as this is the only time Allah would fight.
Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress. Indeed Allah does not like transgressors.
Now while I am not sure why an omnipotent God would need to fight, this makes sense after all one should try protect themselves. But........
And kill them wherever you confront them, and expel them from where they expelled you, for faithlessness is graver than killing.
The first half of verse 191 tells us to fight only those that transgress you as pointed out in 190. However, here transgression can entail belief in another deity or those that have no faith, after all we know that having no faith is exactly the same as murder (all irony intended). Indeed this verse cannot be misinterpreted as not meaning kill the infidel, as later in the Koran it even gets more explicit about the killing of infidels.The last part of verse 191 is a typical get out clause found in religion, as it says you cant do something like kill ever in a place of worship. Well unless you are attacked then it is okay, after all only those infidels would want to kill in the holy place.
But do not fight them near the Holy Mosque unless they fight you therein; but if they fight you, kill them; such is the requital of the faithless.

Verse 192 of the Koran gives non-Islamist's a glimmer of hope when it says
But if they relinquish, then Allah is indeed all-forgiving, all-merciful.
Unfortunately relinquish in this verse means convert to Islam, as is very clearly shown in the verse 193
Fight them until faithlessness is no more, and religion becomes [exclusively] for Allah. Then if they relinquish, there shall be no reprisal except against the wrongdoers. 

So there you have four versus which explicitly show that Muslims should kill non-Muslims, even if it is only during Ramadan. I add the part about only during Ramadan for clarity here, although the Koran does state that this killing is acceptable all the time. It surprises me that Islam can call itself the religion of Peace when it so blatantly calls for killing of others. In fact no matter how I try look at this I cannot see a way past any of the apologetics which attempt to show that in fact these versus only relate to self defense. The truth is that there is no way around this, its clear, and its blatant that Islam is a religion of pure violence.

The last verse I want to address violence is 195, which looks good on the surface as its deals with what could be considered charity
Spend in the way of Allah, and do not cast yourselves with your own hands into destruction; and be virtuous. Indeed Allah loves the virtuous. 
However, this verse in fact deals with the giving of money towards the war effort against the infidels. Perhaps this could explain why the Saudi government so liberally supports Islamic terrorist groups. So what is an infidel like me meant to think about this religion, when it is openly calling for my death?

Remarkably, by posting facts like this people have been called racist (even though Islam is not a race). In response to these claims, I have to wonder if this is Islams way of hiding the truth of what it stands for.

The version of the Koran I am reading is the John Meadows Rodwell translation. An online version can be found at the website
Additionally, for commentary I am utilizing the commentary of Maulana Muhammad Ali which is available at