I have been reading about the history and development of cultures, science, philosophy, the arts etc for close to 30 years, I have read 100s of books on these subjects.
What a shame then that you choose to state the Quran, Islamic teachings and Islamic history so out of context and even in some places with apparent total ignorance of the subject.
You have no real knowledge of the subject and you seem far more intent on trying to handicap an honest debate than imparting anything of any use to anyone.
Hey right back at you Tao!! At least Netti has tried to offer context, an example would be the "verse of the sword" which you quoted and made huge inferences about without any historical context or reference to preceding or following verses.
By the way who named it the verse of the sword? Most certainly it wasn't the Quran or the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).
Am a little hurt that despite my long posts about the history of this verse you haven't even bothered reading them. No sane Muslim believes that verse is anything other than a single event in history, which Netti has already explained very well. No Muslims, other than jihadists, believe it is meant as an instruction for all Muslims for all time or that it abrogates peaceful verses.
You also state the Prophet killed up to 900 Jews all by himself ..... wow his arm must have been aching.
I have posted at length about this incident (the battle of the trench). If you try to read a broad range of authors and not just jihadist rubbish you would know that this account comes from one book (Ibn Ishaq's
Sira) which many historians have relied on since that time and the jurist Imam Malik, a contemporary of the author who by the way wrote his book 145 years after the death of the Prophet, denounced as a liar who only his took his information from the descendents of the tribe (how can you have descenents when every man in the tribe was killed?).
We also know Jews continued to live in Medina after this time, look up Battle of Khaybar ..... how could Jews still live there and work with the Muslims to prepare for this battle if they had all been either banished or killed? (interesting questions like these lead to the logical conclusion that historical accounts hold exaggerations)
Did the Muslims invite the Banu Quraya in for tea and biscuits? No they had broken the treaty and formed an army with Bedouin tribes (Ghatafan, Murra, Fazara, Sulaym, and Ashja'), the Pagans of Mecca and the Jewish tribes of Banu Nadir and Wa'il, in order to once and for all overthrow the Muslims.
The Quran has one small verse mentioning this story, it is literally one line and makes no mention of the numbers killed "He caused those of the People of the Book who helped them (i.e. the Quraysh) to come out of their forts. Some you killed, some you took prisoner." (33:26) ..... strange considering your assertion that the Quran is a pack of lies by a megolomanic claiming Prophethood in order to grab power and wealth .... one would think that such a bloody and glorious victory over the Jews would be shouted from the rooftops in that case.
We also know the men that were killed were kept prisoner in one womans house ...... 900 of them wow it must have been a big house!!
These men were killed for treason and it was their arbitrator Sa'd ibn Mu'adh of the Aws tribe (allies of the Qurayza, thwe tribe in question) that chose their fate. the Nadir tribe also bought and sold the women and children of the Jewish tribe. So it is all not quite as cut and dried as you attempt to make it sound.
Islamic scholars have many views on this story ranging from "so what if 900 men were killed they were traitors trying to wipe out the Muslims", to "nobody knows how many were killed and it was only the fighters against Muslims" to "this story is at best exaggerated and at worst an utter lie".
In the UK at the time people that committed treason were hung, drawn, quartered and their heads displayed on pikes ..... a much nicer fate than beheading don't you agree?!
After I have made my post on the Koran you will get no more of me running around after you.
Oh please send me a link to it and can you also include your credentials regarding your ability to speak and read classical Arabic, which Islamic school you studied at and how long you have been studying the Quran .... no doubt I will have questions for you.
Tao to be fair on this thread you have quoted jihadist clap trap and I am deeply offended that you have told me what I believe and am taught ..... I had better start practicing my fibbing and start planning world domination!!
One small example of where your assertions are wildly misplaced is your continued references to the different books (chronology) of the Quran. Even the greatest Islamic scholars do not know the chronology and the Quran does not have different books, it has era's that scholars refer to. It was never a book as such in the life of the Prophet and when it was developed as such nobody knew the exact chronology and so verses that refer to the same subject were placed together. Scholars attempt to place verses in chronological order based on events mentioned at the time but there are many many verses the scholars cannot even place with any certainty in Mecca or Medina. Perhaps you need to get over here and explain it to them?
As for your comments about one verse abrogating 124 others .... go and sit on the naughty step for quoting jihadist rubbish again. Scholars opinions across the centuries range from no quranic verse can abrogate another and it is simply our lack of understand where verses appear to contradict each other, to yes abrogation exists but to what extent (total abrogation, partial, explaination or addition to), to the modern jihadist cr*p saying it abrogates all peaceful verses.
Needless to say the jihadist stuff is in the vast minority and it troubles me that you are choosing to state their view is the real Islamic doctrine and I must therefore be a lying apologist ..... perhaps when you begin to quote serious Islamic scholars I will answer you more fully.
