The verses of violence?

A repost of an earlier post, with yet another set of documentation…
How is it that some (if not most) Muslims can claim that their religion is peaceful, and accepting, yet others can claim that their religion teaches domination and subjugation? One of the answers is abrogation (To nullify; make void.):
The Qu’ran is a book written essentially in two phases, covering two time periods, and from two cities, Mecca and Medina. The conciliatory verses (Chapters or Suras) are primarily written during the earlier times, when the religion was young, and small, and the prophet lived (with his one wife) in Mecca. The more militaristic, and warlike verses were written later, when the movement had gained in power, and the prophet now lived in Medina (with either ten or a dozen more wives depending on who is counting, including a 9 year old, and the wife of his adopted son), and was seeking to enlarge his territory… A simple comparison details his ‘evangelistic style’: In Mecca, Muhammad preached & exhorted the people to submit to Islam. In Medina however, he used the threat of (and the actual use of) the sword to ‘compel’ people to ‘convert’ to Islam. Many surmise that this is because as he grew in power and comfort, he found less reason/need to be conciliatory.
As the Medinan Suras came later where there is conflict between the two, they abrogate the Meccan ones….
From the article:
“The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called’ hypocrites’ and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.
The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God, however this can work both ways. Most of today’s Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book’s call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad’s own martial legacy – and that of his companions – along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.” –


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s