"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)
"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)
I was wondering how long before we played this game!
I can do it too!
When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace. If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you. However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it. When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword. Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you. Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes†(Deuteronomy 20:10-17)
Do not think that I have come to send peace on earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword. I am sent to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law (Matthew 10:34-35)
We can do this all day!
Now for the truth....Let's see what happens when we look up the same verses from an actual Qur'an that has translation notes and context....
5:51 O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for your allies: they are but allies of one another [72] and whoever of you allies himself with them becomes, verily, one of them; behold, God does not guide such evildoers. [73]
Note 72 (Quran Ref: 5:51 )
According to most of the commentators (e.g., Tabari), this means that each of these two communities extends genuine friendship only to its own adherents-i.e., the Jews to the Jews, and ,the Christians to the Christians-and cannot, therefore, be expected to be really friendly towards the followers of the Qur'an. See also 8:73, and the corresponding note.
Note 73 (Quran Ref: 5:51 )
Lit., "the evildoing folk": i.e., those who deliberately sin in this respect. As regards the meaning of the "alliance" referred to here, see 3:28, and more particularly 4:139 and the corresponding note, which explains the reference to a believer's loss of his moral identity if he imitates the way of life of, or-in Qur'anic terminology-"allies himself" with, non-Muslims. However, as has been made abundantly clear in 60:7-9 (and implied in verse 57 of this surah), this prohibition of a "moral alliance" with non-Muslims does not constitute an injunction against normal, friendly relations with such of them as are well-disposed towards Muslims. It should be borne in mind that the term wali has several shades of meaning: "ally", "friend", "helper", "protector", etc. The choice of the particular term - and sometimes a -combination of two terms-is always dependent on the context.
Now if one was to actually go and read the verses mentioned in the notes, they would see the context, and see like I said previously concerning the topic about Muslims, Jews, and Christians, that this verse and similar is not a theological injunction that forbids Muslims from being friends, partners, etc. with Jews and Christians, but is a historical injunction based on a particular situation when treaties were broken. Furthermore as I would challenge any actual person knowledgeable of Islam and wanted to take the opinion that this was in fact a theological injunction, I would ask them why is it also said in the Qu'ran that Christians are nearest in friendship to Muslims, declare the Jews were chosen by God, and make it permissible to eat Kosher and marry Christians and Jews because they too are believers?
Other deliberately cherry picked and taken out of context verses posted....
8:30 AND [remember, O Prophet,] how those who were bent on denying the truth were scheming against thee, in order to restrain thee [from preaching], or to slay thee, or to drive thee away: thus have they [always] schemed: [30] but God brought their scheming to nought-for God is above all schemers.
Note 30 (Quran Ref: 8:30 )
While the first sentence of this verse is a reference to the persecution to which the Prophet and his followers had been exposed in Mecca before their exodus to Medina, this concluding passage points to the ever-recurring fact of man's religious history that those who deny the truth of divine revelation are always intent on rendering its preachers powerless or destroying them, either physically or, figuratively, through ridicule.
47:4 NOW WHEN you meet [in war] those who are bent on denying the truth, [4] smite their necks until you overcome them fully, and then tighten their bonds; [5] but thereafter [set them free,] either by an act of grace or against ransom, so that the burden of war may be lifted: [6] thus [shall it be]. And [know that] had God so willed, He could indeed punish them [Himself]; but [He wills you to struggle] so as to test you [all] by means of one another. [7] And as for those who are slain in God’s cause, never will He let their deeds go to waste.
Note 4 (Quran Ref: 47:4 )
Sc., "and on barring [others] from the path of God" - thus connecting with verse 1 and laying down the fundamental condition which alone justifies physical warfare: namely, a defense of the Faith and of freedom (cf. in this connection see note 167 on 2:190). In other words, when "those who are bent on denying the truth" try to deprive the Muslims of their social and political liberty and thus to make it impossible for them to live in accordance with the principles of their faith, a just war (jihad) becomes allowable and, more than that, a duty. The whole of the above verse relates to war actually in progress (cf. note 168 on the first part of 2:191); and there is no doubt that it was revealed after 22:39-40, the earliest Quranic reference to physical warfare.
Note 5 (Quran Ref: 47:4 )
Lit., "tighten the bond". According to almost all the commentators, this expression denotes the taking of prisoners of war. In addition, it may also refer to any sanctions or safeguards which would make it unlikely that the aggression could be resumed in the foreseeable future.
Note 6 (Quran Ref: 47:4 )
Lit., "so that (hatta) the war may lay down its burdens". The term "ransom" comprises also, in this context, a mutual exchange of prisoners of war (Zamakhshari , quoting an opinion of Imam Ash-Shafi’i)
Note 7 (Quran Ref: 47:4 )
I.e., so as to enable the believers to prove by actual deeds the depth of their faith and their readiness for self-sacrifice, and to enable the aggressors to realize how wrong they have been, and thus to bring them closer to the truth.
Makes it difficult to trust in the Muslim's words, doesn't it?
Or maybe the one's with trust issues should be those who deliberately cherry pick out of a religious text they are not familiar with?
Peter3_1 in all honesty, your well versed in the Bible. Those verses I posted from the Bible from Matthew and Deuteronomy were examples of what you guys are doing with the Qur'an. You know just like I do that I posted them out of context and without a proper exegesis that doesn't take into account the original language, context, history, or ecclesiastical tradition of the religion(s). Knowing for a fact that Christians do not interpret the verse in Matthew as I posted and Jews and Christians the one from Deuteronomy,
Why do you think it's logical to believe that's the case with Muslims and Islam? Why a different standard?
