Friday, October 03, 2014

A Koran Verse That Sanctions Beheadings

Here's a passage from my copy of The Koran (which I unfortunately just found after misplacing it), which sanctions beheadings in the name of Islam. And that goes for the beheaders of ISIS to the Saudi Arabian government. And this isn't even from "The Verse of the Sword", but from 8:39.


Sajid said...

"(Remember) when your Lord revealed to the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.""

That's what the whole verse says. Allah is commanding the ANGELS, not the men, to behead and cut off finger tips.

Way to extreme for a holy book, but the default interpretation wouldn't be that the Qur'an commands a man to behead his enemy.

It is no surprise then that ISIS has been soundly condemned by the majority of other Muslim governments.

Bosch Fawstin said...

LOL. There is No Islamic argument against ISIS. Mohammad would be leading them were he alive today. Throughout the Koran, there are calls for violence, Muslims against human beings. But even the Angels are bloodthirsty in Islam, as I've read in other passages.

AE said...

Bosch, Sajid is implying that ISIS are angels.

Bosch Fawstin said...


Bosch Fawstin said...

Sajid, here's another violent verse that the "angels" of ISIS bring to life:

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush..."

Sajid said...

With regards to 9:5, read:

I agree that the verse is brutal and could be misinterpreted. However, you are wrong when you claim that the default and original interpretation of that verse is to slaughter non-believers indiscriminately until they surrender or convert.

Sajid said...


Plenty of Scholars have made a case against ISIS and continue to do so. Is it enough to ensure the security of Muslims and Non-Muslims in many majority Muslim nations? No, of course not, but in no way is ISIS representative of Islam that is practiced by the overwhelming majority of Muslims.

Bosch Fawstin said...

Tell it to Allah aka Mohammed

Sajid said...

Allah doesn't exist and Mohammad is long gone. Religion, including Islam, is what is interpreted by Islamic authority, not how you think it should be interpreted by Islamic authority based on what you think Muhammad would have done in a particular situation.

Bosch Fawstin said...

Allah doesn't exist, yes, but Mohammad (IF he existed) is considered by Muslims to be "the perfect model", something along the lines of, in Arabic, Insan al camel, or The Insane Camel as I put it. So he is Far more important to Muslims and their behavior than you're trying to make it seem.

Sajid said...

First, Mohammad definitely existed.

Second, I think you, as I, am a former Muslim. I don't know how pious you were (probably not too much), but tell me really, how much of religion is based on empirical fact and how much is based on a desire to fulfill an emotional need?

If Islam (or any religion) was about following the reality of the religion as the reality of the religion is, why would people be religious in the first place? They would just stick to fact.

Just as with Christianity and Islam, governments and individuals select aspects of their religion to suit their current interpretation of the world.

This doesn't excuse the extremist lines in the Qur'an and the fact that those extremist lines are regularly used to commit crimes and atrocities of the worst kind.

While I do not agree with your view that the ISIS interpretation of Islam is the ideal Islam, I can accept your opinion.

What I do have a problem with is you using your particular (wrong, in my opinion) view of Islam to politically marginalize Muslims in America (Muslim roulette? really?) and to join the strange Objectivist bandwagon that thinks it is a good idea to topple every government in the Middle East that is possibly linked to some kind of Islamist activity.

Their is a personal Islam, a cultural Islam, a social Islam and a political Islam. But Lumping them all into one to give yourself an excuse to drop as many bombs until the enemy submits? Sounds a bit Islamic.

Bosch Fawstin said...

Like another ex-Muslim, Barack Hussein Obama, your real concern isn't with the victims of Islam, but with the reputation of Islam and Muslims. To Hell with Islam and to Hell with Muslims who are in Any way working towards spreading it. Ex-Muslims who still get defensive about Islam aren't ex enough. Now move along, you've embarrassed yourself enough already.

Sajid said...

"your real concern isn't with the victims of Islam, but with the reputation of Islam and Muslims"

My concern isn't about the "reputation of Islam", whatever that means. It is about the 200,000 combat lives in the Iraq and Afghanistan war, 110,000 lives lost in the Syria war, millions of refugees created and yet you think more bombs and more violence in the region is the solution.

This isn't getting "defensive" about Islam. It is about acknowledging facts that you just don't understand. The US government has completely destroyed parts of the Middle East over the past 13 years and yet you think they should go further and bomb the Iranians and the Saudis too. What is your goal--a Middle East in which there are no Muslims?

Frankly it isn't even wholly about you. It is about you being a mouthpiece for an incredibly dangerous strain of Objectivism that seeks to invade, decimate and destroy anything that it perceives to be even a half-threat to one American life. It seeks to replace an international system of law and order (whether theoretical or extant) with the point of an American Hellfire missile.

Bosch Fawstin said...

"a dangerous strain of Objectivism"? Bingo. Move along, Punk.