mgen
JF-Expert Member
- Nov 18, 2010
- 23,169
- 9,054
Kwa hiyo anae apia kwenye koloani ni allah ndivyo [emoji350] [emoji53] [emoji101]
" binadamu ndio anaweza kuapa kwa Muumba tu" hii sentensi umeiona ? Ahahahahhaah uwe unasoma ebu wacha kukimbia kama unaharisha , nilichokwambia Mungu pekee ndio anaweza apa kwa akitakacho , lakini binadamu anatakiwa aape kwa Muumba tu basi ahhahahahhahahh ahahahhaahahajaajajjaa uwe unasoma wanachoandika watu Ahahahahaahahaahaha
we nawe huna akili hao wanasayansi wameumbwa na nani? mwanasayansi kazi yake ni kutafiti alichoumba M/mungu je kamaliza kutafiti vyote? kama ndio aende akatafiti mwili wa Pharaoh kwa nini hauozi kama binadam mwingineSoma wote na kisha urejee kwenye mjadala mkuu! Tunataka kuelewa nani hasa Muongo kati ya Mungu na wanasayansi?
Wewe umeathirika na hizo picha.
Apart from Holy Bible, there are other books talk about Virgin Mary his life and Death.. Including horrible QuranFrom Merest Shadow to Queen of Heaven
Who?
Scripture may have very little to say about Jesus; it has even less to say about his supposed mother.
For the earliest Christians ‘Mary Mother of Jesus’ almost did not exist: they were not interested in the nativity of their god-man – it was his re-birth after death that mattered.
Paul does not mention Mary (or Joseph) at all, and in the gospels, the shadowy figure of Mary, destined to become the most pre-eminent of all the saints and Queen of Heaven, at best, is a two-dimensional nonentity.
In the gospel pageant, ‘Mary’ appears in several scenes. In all of them she is a passive character, habitually in the background and virtually without a voice (she speaks in total three times, twice in a single sentence).
She is not described (but then, none of the gospel characters are!); nor do we know her age. She is a bit player, primarily with ‘witnessing’ parts.
We learn nothing of her origins, save for the family connection to cousin Elizabeth and as betrothed of Joseph. She appears first in the so-called ‘Annunciation’ (at the well ..?) when an angel maps out her career.
With little ado, she accepts the ‘blessed’ role revealed to her (Luke 1.38) and rushes off to spend three months in the mountains with the pregnant Elizabeth (she who will mother John the Baptist).
In this, her biggest scene, Mary delivers her only set-piece speech (such articulation at this gob-smacking moment!) – the so-called 'Magnificat':
My soul doth magnify the Lord,
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden:
for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For he that is mighty hath done to me great things;
and holy is his name.
And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.
He hath shewed strength with his arm;
he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He hath put down the mighty from their seats,
He hath filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich he hath sent empty away.
He hath helpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;
As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.
(Luke 1.46,55)
God only knows who was also in the room (or was it a cave? ) to record all this!
Perhaps she wrote her memoirs. (In truth, the piece is an obvious adaptation of the song of Hannah in 1 Samuel 2).
But after this soliloquy Mary has not a word to say for herself. She witnesses visits of shepherds and wise men and ‘ponders’ (Luke 2.16); she is taken to Egypt (Matthew 2.13.18) and brought back to Galilee; she puzzles at her twelve-year old’s claim to messiahship (Luke 2.48,52); she witnesses the turning of water to wine (John 2.1,12); she is rejected by her super-star off-spring (Luke 8. 19,21); she witnesseshis crucifixion (John 19.25,27); and she waits for the holy spirit (Acts 1.14).
P Her ultimate fate is not revealed and she is credited with no role at all in the creation of the Christian Church.
Hata hiyo sura 5:82 hiko wazi kabisa imetaja watu wanne kuna MAYAHUDI, WASHIRIKINA, WAKRISTO , WAUMINI( waislamu wa kweli) Ahahahaahhahhahhhaah lakini waliokaribu na WAUMINI ni WAKRISTO aya ya 5:83 imeweka wazi hao WAKRISTO wakiona HAKI uifuata , mimi nakuonyesha HAKI , ni juu yako kuifuata
QURAN 3:19
" Bila shaka dini ya HAKI mbele ya Mwenyezi Mungu ni Uislamu";
hivyo kama wewe ndio ulietajwa humu fuata haki hiyo Ahahahahaahahaahaha wacha kulia lia
KUNA HAWA HAWANA ELIMU WALA MAARIFA. Ahahahahaahahaahaha njoo uwatangaze
MATENDO YA MITUME 4:13
" Basi walipoona ujasiri wa Petro na Yohana,na kuwajua ya kuwa ni watu wasio na ELIMU, wasio na MAARIFA, wakastaajabu , wakawatambua ya kwamba walikuwa pamoja na Yesu",
Ahahahahaahahaahaha watangaze na hao kuwa hawana elimu Ahahhahahaahaaahah
mjinga anasema atafuta ujinga [emoji15] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] wewe ni abuu jeheri kama Hujui [emoji12]Aahhhhhhhhhhhhjhhhjh mwaka huu tutafuta ujinga wote humu Ahahahaaa hili la kwanza , mengine yatafuata ahahahhaahahahh
Kumbe allah ni binadamu anaapia kwa aliye Umba [emoji4] asante kwa ilimu [emoji122] [emoji122] [emoji106]" binadamu ndio anaweza kuapa kwa Muumba tu" hii sentensi umeiona ? Ahahahahhaah uwe unasoma ebu wacha kukimbia kama unaharisha , nilichokwambia Mungu pekee ndio anaweza apa kwa akitakacho , lakini binadamu anatakiwa aape kwa Muumba tu basi ahhahahahhahahh ahahahhaahahajaajajjaa uwe unasoma wanachoandika watu Ahahahahaahahaahaha
Evidence refuting the Qur’ān’s claim of i‘jāz (“inimitability”).Hii si dilemma ndogo ya Roho Mtakatifu kutoka makalioni na watu kuitikia Aamin
A priest farts in the middle of mass and says it was the Holy Spirit
Shida ya watumwa ni moja tu. Hamsomi maandiko. natoka mlishe akili za kingono ngono na bwana wenu Allah. Hivyo kila msomapo tafriri ya kwanza ngono.
soma hili andiko alilotumia mtumwa mwenzako.Galatia 5:15.
Najua huwezi soma kisa umekaririshwa.
Soma kuanzia 5:7 hapo mpaka mwisho upate kuelewa nini Paul anazungumza.
7Mwenendo wenu ulikuwa mzuri! Nani, basi aliyewazuia kuuzingatia ukweli?8Aliyesababisha hali hiyo si Mungu ambaye amewaiteni. 9chachu kidogo tu huchachusha donge lote la unga! 10Kutokana na kuungana kwetu na Bwana, nina tumaini kubwa kwamba ninyi hamtakuwa na msimamo tofauti nami. Tena yeyote huyo anayewavurugeni--awe nani au nani--hakika ataadhibiwa. 11Na kwa upande wangu, ndugu zangu, kama bado ninahubiri kwamba kutahiriwa ni lazima, kwa nini basi, bado ninadhulumiwa? Kama ingalikuwa hivyo, mahubiri yangu juu ya msalaba wa Kristo yasingalileta aibu yoyote. 12Laiti hao wanaowavurugeni wangejikatakata wenyewe!
13Ninyi, ndugu, mliitwa muwe watu huru. Lakini uhuru huo usiwe kisingizio cha kutawaliwa na tamaa za kidunia; ila mnapaswa kutumikiana kwa upendo.14Maana Sheria yote hutimizwa katika kushika amri hii moja: "Mpende jirani yako kama unavyojipenda mwenyewe." 15Lakini ikiwa mtaumana na kutafunana kama wanyama, jihadharini msije mkaangamizana wenyewe kwa wenyewe!
16Basi, nasema hivi: mwenendo wenu na uongozwe na Roho, nanyi hamtafuata tena tamaa za kidunia. 17Maana, tamaa za kidunia hupingana na matakwa ya Roho; na matakwa ya Roho hupingana na tamaa za kidunia. Mambo hayo mawili hayaafikiani; kwa sababu hiyo hamwezi kufanya yale mnayotaka ninyi wenyewe.18Kama mkiongozwa na Roho, basi, hamko tena chini ya Sheria. 19Basi, matendo ya kidunia yanajulikana: uzinzi, uasherati, ufisadi; 20kuabudu sanamu, uchawi, uadui, ugomvi, wivu, hasira, choyo, mabishano, mafarakano; 21husuda, ulevi, ulafi na mambo mengine kama hayo. Nawaambieni tena kama nilivyokwisha sema: watu wanaotenda mambo hayo hawatakuwa na nafasi yao katika ufalme wa Mungu. 22Lakini matokeo ya kuongozwa na Roho ni mapendo, furaha, amani, uvumilivu, wema, fadhili, uaminifu, 23upole na kuwa na kiasi. Hakuna Sheria inayoweza kupinga mambo hayo. 24Wale walio wa Kristo wameisulubisha hali yao ya kidunia pamoja na mawazo yake mabaya na tamaa zake.
25Tukiishi kwa msaada wa Roho, na tuufuate mwongozo wake. 26Basi, tusijivune, tusichokozane wala kuoneana wivu.
Hapa Paul ametolea mfano wa maisha ya wanyama kuwa hawanakujua kufanya shambulio ni shida/dhambi ndio maana unakuta simba anamuua chui na hawezi kumla, au anawua watoto wa mwengine ili tu naye apate wa kwake kwenye jike hilo hilo(anaongozwa na tamaa za kimwili)
sasa msomaji kasoma nusu mmekimbilia kwenye ngono. mbona hakumalizia hapa
15Lakini ikiwa mtaumana na kutafunana kama wanyama, jihadharini msije mkaangamizana wenyewe kwa wenyewe!
Kumbe allah ni binadamu anaapia kwa aliye Umba [emoji4] asante kwa ilimu [emoji122] [emoji122] [emoji106]
Apart from Holy Bible, there are other books talk about Virgin Mary his life and Death.. Including horrible Quran
Evidence refuting the Qur’ān’s claim of i‘jāz (“inimitability”).
A famous common example concerns Muḥammad’s prophesy that the Romans (translated by Palmer as “The Greeks”) would have victory over the Persians in Qur'an 30.2-4:
The Greeks are overcome in the highest parts of the land; but after being overcome they shall overcome in a few years; to God belongs the order before and after; and on that day the believers shall rejoice….
Sources state that when the Persians had victory over the Romans in AD 616, the news reached Mecca. The tribe of Muḥammad, the Quraysh, rejoiced at the defeat of the Romans because they were Christians, whereas the Persians were Magi. Muḥammad was not happy with that, so he declared, “The Greeks are overcome…but…they shall overcome….”
The scholars of Islām have declared that the verse is evidence to the prophethood of Muḥammad as it foretold the victory of the Romans over the Persians that took place in AH 4/AD 625.
However, this claim has no support in the text. What is clear is that Muḥammad was responding to the rejoicing people of the Quraysh by reminding them that history will turn and the Persians would face defeat one day.
The Quraysh might have interpreted the victory of the Magi as evidence to the supremacy of that faith over Christianity, as al-Rāzī deduced. He wrote in his commentary that these verses came “to show that victory does not indicate rightness.”
There is another variant reading that says, “The Romans overcome…and they shall be overcome….”
The commentaries on this reading state that after the Battle of Badr (AH 2/AD 624), when the news of the Romans’ victory over the Persians reached the Muslims, this verse came to promise the Muslims’ victory over the Romans in the future.
Those who end up victorious in the first reading, end up defeated in the second.
According to the first reading, where the Romans would defeat the Persians at the end, the “prophecy” would have been revealed in Mecca three to five years before the Hijra.
According to the second reading, this “prophecy” was revealed in Medina.
Therefore, we have a disagreement in the historical background and the nature of the promise. (Will the Romans overcome or be overcomed?) Despite this discrepancy, the Islāmic scholars did not hesitate to draw the curtains over these details to justify the saying that the text is a prophetic miracle. The gratitude for unveiling this “inimitability” goes to the variant readings of the Qur’ān.
Evidence refuting the Qur’ān’s claim of i‘jāz (“inimitability”).
A famous common example concerns Muḥammad’s prophesy that the Romans (translated by Palmer as “The Greeks”) would have victory over the Persians in Qur'an 30.2-4:
The Greeks are overcome in the highest parts of the land; but after being overcome they shall overcome in a few years; to God belongs the order before and after; and on that day the believers shall rejoice….
Sources state that when the Persians had victory over the Romans in AD 616, the news reached Mecca. The tribe of Muḥammad, the Quraysh, rejoiced at the defeat of the Romans because they were Christians, whereas the Persians were Magi. Muḥammad was not happy with that, so he declared, “The Greeks are overcome…but…they shall overcome….”
The scholars of Islām have declared that the verse is evidence to the prophethood of Muḥammad as it foretold the victory of the Romans over the Persians that took place in AH 4/AD 625.
However, this claim has no support in the text. What is clear is that Muḥammad was responding to the rejoicing people of the Quraysh by reminding them that history will turn and the Persians would face defeat one day.
The Quraysh might have interpreted the victory of the Magi as evidence to the supremacy of that faith over Christianity, as al-Rāzī deduced. He wrote in his commentary that these verses came “to show that victory does not indicate rightness.”
There is another variant reading that says, “The Romans overcome…and they shall be overcome….”
The commentaries on this reading state that after the Battle of Badr (AH 2/AD 624), when the news of the Romans’ victory over the Persians reached the Muslims, this verse came to promise the Muslims’ victory over the Romans in the future.
Those who end up victorious in the first reading, end up defeated in the second.
According to the first reading, where the Romans would defeat the Persians at the end, the “prophecy” would have been revealed in Mecca three to five years before the Hijra.
According to the second reading, this “prophecy” was revealed in Medina.
Therefore, we have a disagreement in the historical background and the nature of the promise. (Will the Romans overcome or be overcomed?) Despite this discrepancy, the Islāmic scholars did not hesitate to draw the curtains over these details to justify the saying that the text is a prophetic miracle. The gratitude for unveiling this “inimitability” goes to the variant readings of the Qur’ān.
Kakufundisha baba fatuû eeh [emoji15] [emoji350]Nani kasema maneno ya John 1:1 na John 1:14 , mungu wako shoga cesare borgia kujiwekea nyama kwenye skeleton ??
Kakufundisha baba fatuû eeh [emoji15] [emoji350]
Islām’s relationship with people of other faiths can be traced to sūra al-Tawba (Q 9), one of the most definitive chapters of the Qur’ān regarding interpersonal relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. As one of the last “revealed” chapters, sūra al-Tawba (Q 9) is the foundation for Islām’s perception and treatment of non-Muslims. It provides value judgments regarding all other religions and organizes a set of principles for dealing with their adherents. Finally, this sūra settles the understanding of jihād[D] by describing it as a duty-bound tool for dealing with the unbelievers, “the misbelievers,” of Islām.
Warlike Tone of al-Tawba
In general, this sūra conveys a warlike quality, as evidenced in two areas.
A. Names of the Sūra.
Exegetical sources mention different names for the sūra. The most common are al-Barā’a (“Disavowal by God”) and al-Tawba (“Repentance”). But other names and descriptions embody a more combatant spirit of the sūra: al-Mukhzīya (“the Shaming One”), al-Munakkila (“the Torturer”), and al-Musharrida (“the Displacer”).
It is told that Ḥudhayfa said, “You call it sūra al-Tawba [Repentance], but it is indeed sūra al-‘Adhāb [Torment].”
B. Omission of al-Basmala
Q 9 is the only sūra in the Qur’ān that does not begin with the Basmala[D] (“IN the name of the merciful and compassionate God…”). Listed below are two of the most common reasons that have been offered to explain its absence:
1. Basmala refers to mercy and security, yet this sūra contains verses that encourage fighting. For this reason, many believe the Basmala was dropped from this sūra.
2. During the time of this sūra’s revelation, the Arabs would typically remove the Basmala when writing a document that contained a breach to a covenant. Thus, this sūra was read without the Basmala, according to that tradition.
The imprinting of this sūra with the “WAR BRAND” goes back to the fact that it was composed during several stages of time that were full of military battles. This historical theater of operations included several important military campaigns:
• Making preparations to occupy Mecca (verses 13-15), a conquest that took place in the eighth year of the Hegira (AH 8/AD 630). Plans were also underway for the Battle of Ḥunayn, which took place immediately after the conquest of Mecca (Q 9.25).
• Carrying out the Raid of Tabūk along the Syrian borders (AH 9/AD 631), the first battle for Muslims with opponents from outside the Arabian Peninsula.
• Annulling the peace treaties. In the ninth year of the Hegira (AH 9/AD 631), Muḥammad sent Abū Bakr to Mecca to lead the pilgrims. As soon as Abū Bakr arrived at Mecca, ‘Alī Ibn Abī Ṭālib caught up with him with a command from Muḥammad to read the first part of Q 9 to the pilgrims.
This part included the annulment of every peace agreement Muḥammad had contracted with the idolatrous Arab tribes, as well as the banning of other religions in the heart of the Arabian Peninsula so that Islām would become the only religion.
The sūra divides the people of other religions into two groups:
• al-mushrikūn (“the idolaters”): People who believe in nonbiblical faiths
• People of the Book: Jews and Christians Based on this division, Q 9 specifies the rules for the treatment of these groups.
1. Treatment of al-Mushrikūn (“the idolaters”) (verses 1-28)
As prescribed in Q 9, Muslims must force, if necessary, idolators to accept Islām or risk captivity or death by Muslim forces, because al-mushrikūn are dishonest, evil, and unclean.
A. Extermination Campaign (verses 1-6)
Verse 1 of the sūra annuls every covenant that was made between Muḥammad and the Muslims on one side and the al-mushrikūn on the other side. It also gives a grace period, in verse 2, of “four months,” which the idolaters could move freely. Afterward, they would become targets of the sword of Islām. Muḥammad wanted to give the four-month period a chance to frighten the idolaters so that they would have “in it plenty of time to consider their matter and to think about their end: to choose between Islām or the preparation for resistance and clashing.”
In verse 3 it threatens that although the idolaters had been given a chance, Allah will bring upon them killing and captivity in this world and torment in the next. Then it advises the idolaters to adopt Islām, trying to persuade them that it would be better for them. So verse 3 gives the idolaters two choices: accept Islām or face war.
Verse 5 then says that after the four-month grace period has expired, it becomes permissible to spill the blood of the idolaters wherever they may be found in the Arabian Peninsula, even if they are on the premises of al-Ka‘ba[D]. Everyone who has adopted the religion of Islām would be spared. This verse also commands the Muslims to lie in wait for the idolaters in all their paths and to kill them wherever and whenever possible. Thus, this verse imposes on the Muslims the requirement to treat the believers of other nonbiblical religions as enemies.
This verse states the following RULES OF COMBAT :
• Kill idolaters immediately if they fall into the hands of the Muslims.
the idolaters in their homes and forbid them to move.
• Lie in wait for idolaters everywhere so that they would find it impossible to move without Islāmic supervision. (The scholars say that lying in wait for the idolaters is a “general” ruling.
It is not limited to the Arabian Peninsula during that time only but applies to every time and place.)
• Offer freedom and peace if the idolaters adopt Islām and abandon their own religion, committing themselves to prayer and almsgiving:
The two conditions of prayer and almsgiving are strictly emphasized because prayer is the symbolic expression of the individual’s submission to the god of Islām, and almsgiving is the tangible expression of submission to the Islāmic government and recognition of the legitimacy of that government. The following verse also stresses that adopting Islām as a religion must be accompanied by prayer and almsgiving: “But if they repent and are steadfast in prayer and give alms, then they are your brethren in religion…” (Q 9.11).
At the end of verse 5, Muḥammad announces that the idolater’s adoption of Islām (or his surrender) prevents him from being killed because “God is forgiving and merciful.” Forgiveness and mercy are only offered on the condition of surrendering to the will of the Muslims.
Verse 6 indicates a situation where a idolater may be given temporary security if he expresses a desire to become acquainted with Islām. If the idolater refuses to accept Islām, he is permitted to leave safely. However, war would then be declared on him anew. Therefore, the aim of the temporary easement was only to deliver and spread the message of Islām.
B. Discredit of the Idolaters (verses 7, 8, and 10)
Q 9 questions the honesty of the idolaters. Verse 7 asks the negative question, “How do the idolaters have the right to attain a covenant with the Muslims?” when, according to the accusation of this verse, the idolaters would not honor such a relationship or a covenant if they overcame the Muslims. The same accusation is repeated in verse 10.
The following verse (Q 9.8) claims that the idolaters will practice a policy of dissimulation when they are weak (and cannot prevail) even as their hearts are full of resentment and hatred. All these verses aim to make the idolaters look dishonest and evil so that the Muslim would see it to be his duty to implement the tasks appointed by the previous verses: killing, besieging, and lying in wait.
C. Idolaters’ Uncleanliness (verse 28)
The incitement against the idolaters continues with the text in verse 28: “It is only the idolaters [idolaters] who are unclean....” The word najasun (“unclean”) is a root word, the use of which makes “masculine and feminine; singular, dual, and plural equal. [This word’s] intent is to exaggerate in the description by making the described to be the definition of that description [our emphasis].”
This word does not appear anywhere else in the Qur’ān. The Muslim scholars give two opinions regarding the meaning of najasun: • The word najasun used as a description is a metaphor meant to show contempt. Others also say that the idolaters are described as unclean because they do not hold to the Muslim cleansing rituals
• Idolaters are unclean by nature. It is told that Ibn ‘Abbās said, “Their notables are unclean like the dogs and the pigs.”In another source he states “that their notables are as dirty as dogs.” The Twelvers (the largest branch of Shiite Islām) also declare that non-Muslims are literally “najasun.”
The term najasun generates several repulsive descriptions in the mind of the Muslim: • Unclean: meaning unhygienic and dirty; a thought that aims to create a pathological aversion towards the other.
• Moral impurity: meaning corrupt morals, which plays a role in feeding into the hatred towards the other by portraying him as impure; thus, the world must be purified of him. The sūra also uses a similar term, al-rijsu (“abomination”), which means “dirty,” a thing that is nasty or an ugly act. This word was used as a description of a party that refused to participate in the Raid of Tabūk; so it was said about them, “Verily, they are a plague…” (Q 9.95).
3Treatment of People of the Book (verses 29-35)
These verses address the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) and contain several accusations to justify Islāmic law against them. The verses state that the People of the Book should be fought for the following reasons:
1. They do not believe in Allah.
2. They do not believe in the Day of Judgment.[D]
3. They do not keep the prohibitions of Islām: “...and who forbid not what God and His Apostle have forbidden…”(Q 9.29).
4. They do not adopt Islām as their religion: “...and who do not practice the religion of truth...” (Q 9.29).
The first and second items show a lack of understanding regarding the doctrines of Judaism and Christianity. Instead, the content resembles a political statement, the goal of which is to incite fighting and not introduce the Muslims to these two religions or start a dialogue with them.
A. Al-Jizya (verse 29)
If the People of the Book would not adopt Islām as their religion, then verse 29 gives the condition that
fighting them would only stop if they gave al-jizya[D], a fine (tribute) for living in Islāmic lands: “...until they pay the tribute by their hands and be as little ones…” (Q 9.29). So what does this mean?
1. “by their hands” (‘an yadin)
• The Christian or the Jew would pay the fine personally; no one else can do it in his place.
• The Christian or the Jew, helpless and powerless, would feel compelled (forced) to pay the fine.
• The Christian or the Jew would pay the fine in appreciation of the graciousness of Islām [for sparing his life and letting him live in a Muslim land].
2. “and be as little ones” (wa hum ṣāghirūn)
• It means that while a Jew or Christian is cowering and submissive, “The lowly despicable person is called ṣaghir [“subdued”].”
• Scholars provide even more detailed meanings for subdued: The Christian or the Jew should pay it standing straight, while the one receiving it would be seated.
When the payee of the jizya reaches the person receiving it, the Muslim man receiving it would take him by the throat and say to him, “pay the jizya.”
Others say, once he pays, he gets slapped on his behind. It is also said that he is to be taken by his beard and beaten on his jaw. It is said as well that he is to be taken violently by the collar of his clothes and dragged to the place of payment.
Subdued means that the Christian or the Jew would present the jizya in spite of his hatred of it.
The commentaries on this verse say that the People of the Book who reside within the borders of the Islāmic country should not be respected, nor should they be held in a higher regard than the Muslims. Such a policy was implemented after Muḥammad gave this order to the Muslims: “Do not greet the Jews and Christians first, and, if you meet one of them along the way, force him to take the narrowest of it.”
B. False Accusations
Just like the previous verses aimed at discrediting the idolaters, other verses in Q 9 seem designed to plant hatred in Muslims by presenting allegations to create a negative image of the People of the Book:
1. Verse 29 considers their doctrines to be null and void, that they “do not practice the religion of truth….”
2. Verse 30 attributes to the Jews the false saying: “Ezra is the son of God….”
3. Verse 30 disputes and belittles the claim that “Christians say that the Messiah [Christ] is the son of God….”
4. Verse 31 claims that the Jews “take their doctors [rabbis and religious leaders]… as lords” and the Christians “take…their monks…and the Messiah the son of Mary” to be their lords.
5. Verse 32 adds that these doctors and monks “desire to put out the light of God with their mouths….”
6. Verse 34 claims a large percentage of “the doctors and monks devour the wealth of men openly” and hinders them from adopting Islām.
To many Muslims, these accusations justify fighting against the People of the Book. In his commentary on verses 30-31, Ibn Kathīr makes this blunt declaration: “This is an enticement from Allah almighty for the believers to fight the blaspheming idolatrous Jews and Christians [our emphasis], for their saying this heinous fabrication against Allah.”
In verses 34-35 the inclusion of Jewish and Christian leaders expands the incrimination against the Jews and Christians and serves to introduce yet more inflammatory text to the rest of the sūra that incites fighting against the People of the Book.
The description by Ibn Kathīr of the Jews and the Christians as idolaters echoes the previous passage in verse 28, which describes idolaters as unclean. Now the description of najasun (“unclean”) is no longer limited to the believers in nonbiblical religions only but also includes the People of the Book, because—according to Ibn Kathīr—they are idolaters as well. In one verse, the Qur’ān describes the Jews as “the idolaters.” The Qur’ān also accuses Christians of denying the oneness of God and believing there are three gods (Q 5.73; compare with Q 4.171). In Q 3.64, Jews and the Christians are accused of associating others with Allah [worshipping others along with Allah]. Based on these Qur’ānic descriptions, the Arabic concordance offers this definition of the word shirk: “To have shirk in Allah: to have a partner in his reign…the noun is al-shirku…to associate with Allah a partner in his Lordship…."
Hence, the term al-shirk in the Qur’ān includes the idolatrous religions found in the Arabian Peninsula at that time, as well as the biblical religions, Judaism and Christianity. Based on this denotation, the Muslim legislators state that the People of the Book “are of the same status as the unclean notables in the imperative to avoid them.”
Al-Ḥassan says, “He who shakes hands with a mushrik [idolater] must perform wuḍū’ [ablutions] again.”
The Ẓāhiriya[D], the Shiite Twelvers[D], and the Sunnīs concur with this opinion.
These three groups constitute the largest currents in Islām. A modern scholar states that the People of the Book are “evil ones [and] wicked, due to the shirk, oppression, and ugliness of morals.”
This suspicion with regard to the non-Muslim’s ethics and morals established the principle of “Loyalty and Repudiation.”
C. Loyalty and Repudiation (verses 23, 24, 71, 113, 114)
Sūra Q 9 commands the Muslims to establish their ties on the basis of religious sectarianism and not of kinship. It says that there is no such thing as loyalty between a Muslim and his fathers or brothers.
Furthermore, the Muslim who befriends one who is not Muslim is considered one of the oppressors. The Qur’ān points out the necessity of being at enmity with all who are at enmity with Islām, “even if they were their fathers, or their sons, or their brethren, or their clansmen…” (Q 58.22). In Q 60.16, the Qur’ān stresses that it is not permissible to establish a relationship between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. In Q 35.5, it completely forbids being loyal to (befriending) the People of the Book. In Q 9.71, a Muslim is to be loyal only to another Muslim. On the psychological level, it is not permissible, according to verse 113, to even think about seeking forgiveness “for the idolaters, even though they be their kindred.” The commentaries say that verse 113 was revealed in Mecca to stop Muḥammad from praying for forgiveness for his uncle who had just died.
It is told that Muḥammad came to Abū Ṭalib at the time of his dying and asked him to say the expression, “There is no god but Allah,” but Abū Ṭalib refused. So the verse came following his death: “Then it was added to this Medinan sūra because it was suitable to its rulings….It is also narrated by a group that it was revealed when he [Muḥammad] visited his mother’s tomb and asked forgiveness for her.”
Thus, it is not permissible for a Muslim to ask for forgiveness for a non-Muslim, even if it is his dead mother. The sūra underscores this point in the following verse, by offering Ibrahīm (Abraham) as an example to be followed. When Abraham realized that his father did not believe in his religion, “he dissociated himself from him.”
Nisha-kupotezea kafir innsui wee [emoji53] [emoji12] [emoji33] [emoji33]Kakufundisha baba fatuû eeh, ndiye alikuambia mungu wako shoga Cesare borgia kuwa kaandika John 1:1 na John 1:14???
Islām’s relationship with people of other faiths can be traced to sūra al-Tawba (.”