Lee Rigby's killers trial

[charmer]

Since when? the Qur'aan states as does the bible "Thou shalt not kill"

 

Yes, but it also condones murder of non believers, as do your Haddiths. The bible does too.

 

Anyone who has read the bible and the Qu'ran and consider them to be peaceful novels must have different opinions about what peace is than myself.

[SnailyBoy]

Since when? the Qur'aan states as does the bible "Thou shalt not kill"

 

Both books condone killing.

 

According to the Bible the Abrahamic god is a rather nasty mass murderer.

[angos]

Since when? the Qur'aan states as does the bible "Thou shalt not kill"

 

There are 109 verses in the Qur'an which can be used to justify killing another human.

God said, if we are to believe Mohammad.

"And kill them wherever you find them" God words can easily be used to justify killing.

[Plain Talker]

Yes, but it also condones murder of non believers, as do your Haddiths. The bible does too.

 

Anyone who has read the bible and the Qu'ran and consider them to be peaceful novels must have different opinions about what peace is than myself.

 

Both books condone killing.

 

According to the Bible the Abrahamic god is a rather nasty mass murderer.

 

I cannot find the words "Except unbelievers" amongst these commands from God:-

 

Nor take life - which God has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him nor exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). (The Noble Quran, 17:33)"

 

"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"

 

 

Notice the following parts:

 

1- "...except for just cause..."

 

2- "...unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land..."

 

They clearly prove that Allah Almighty definitely prohibits murder. Unjust killing of an innocent person is equivalent to terrorism and mass-slaughter (killing all or most people).

 

 

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

 

Note particularly how God says "I commanded you not to kill, but you still continue to do it!"

[angos]

Both books condone killing.

 

According to the Bible the Abrahamic god is a rather nasty mass murderer.

 

God is like a deranged toy maker, he blames his defective toys for everything that goes wrong, and then in a fit of rage he destroys them all. Its time for God to take a long look in the mirror and accept that everything that is wrong is Gods fault.

 

---------- Post added 03-12-2013 at 19:11 ----------

 

I cannot find the words "Except unbelievers" amongst these commands from God:-

 

 

 

Note particularly how God says "I commanded you not to kill, but you still continue to do it!"

 

except for just cause.

 

Thats the bit you ignored, the two men think their cause was just.

[charmer]

I cannot find the words "Except unbelievers" amongst these commands from God:-

 

 

 

Note particularly how God says "I commanded you not to kill, but you still continue to do it!"

 

 

 

Hmm it seems most of your quote has gone. May I ask you;

 

a) What is just cause? Is it for a murder, or "cos he looked at me funny"

 

b) What is spreading mischief in the land - This is a quote I pointed out to you earlier in the conversation.

Was Drummer Rigby spreading mischief by being part of an illegal invasion force?

Was I spreading mischief in the land when I was younger and used to knock on peoples doors and run away?

 

You claimed in your last post that the Qu'ran says "thou shalt not kill", now you admin that there are two huge caveats that allow killing, that are neither precise nor objective.

 

I am not hating on the Qu'ran, it is a better book than the Bible in my opinion.

Just as Islam is a more peaceful religion than Christianity (anyone who wants to discuss this, please either pm me or start another thread)

 

I am just pointing out that what you have said twice in this thread is incorrect. As you yourself have pointed out your previous inaccuracies one must ask the question, where you deliberately mis-quoting the Qu'ran to suit your agenda or have you re-read you Qu'ran in the time between both posts and reaslised you were wrong?

[Plain Talker]

There are 109 verses in the Qur'an which can be used to justify killing another human.

God said, if we are to believe Mohammad.

"And kill them wherever you find them" God words can easily be used to justify killing.

 

have you heard the take of the Bibliomancer, who took the bible in such a way, that he let the bible fall open at a random verse, and used this "instruction" to dictate his actions for the day?

 

the first verse was "And Judas took a rope and hanged himself" (Matthew 27)

 

then he took the bible and did this act again, the book then fell open a second time, at the verse "Go thou and do likewise!" (Luke 10 V 37 b)

 

Both the Bible and the Qur'an are open to the unlearned and unschooled taking a single verse, or quote, out of context, referring to neither the exegesis nor the hermeneutics of the verse or quote and using it to mean practically anything they wish, to justify any idiotic theorem.

 

The secret to understanding the scriptures is to have a grounding in the background and context of the times when the scripture was revealed. For example in the bible, the context of a verse as revealed will refer to whether there was peace or war, whether the Hebrews were living under the rule of a good and Godly king, or a corrupt and disbelieving king.

 

In the Qur'an, we have verses revealed when there was peace in the lands, and others revealed when there was trouble and warfare.

 

The Qur'an dictates when it is legal to wage war, and dictates how to wage war, and to treat the captured prisoners of war in a just and humane manner.

 

It instructs the soldiers to kill only those whom they are legally permitted to kill, and to cause no harm to those who are not legitimate combatants, such as women, children and the elderly, and that they must not destroy livestock (except that which they have immediate need of, for food) or the infrastructure (roads and buildings).

 

---------- Post added 03-12-2013 at 19:26 ----------

 

God is like a deranged toy maker, he blames his defective toys for everything that goes wrong, and then in a fit of rage he destroys them all. Its time for God to take a long look in the mirror and accept that everything that is wrong is Gods fault.

 

---------- Post added 03-12-2013 at 19:11 ----------

 

 

 

 

Thats the bit you ignored, the two men think their cause was just.

 

the Qur'an tells us what is just cause:- if it is a legitimate death sentence handed down in a court of law, or if it is a "kill-or-be killed" situation, such as clear and present danger to oneself or one's family, or in a legitimate war, (and even then the person killed must be another combatant).

 

---------- Post added 03-12-2013 at 19:36 ----------

 

Hmm it seems most of your quote has gone. May I ask you;

 

a) What is just cause? Is it for a murder, or "cos he looked at me funny"

 

b) What is spreading mischief in the land - This is a quote I pointed out to you earlier in the conversation.

Was Drummer Rigby spreading mischief by being part of an illegal invasion force?

Was I spreading mischief in the land when I was younger and used to knock on peoples doors and run away?

 

You claimed in your last post that the Qu'ran says "thou shalt not kill", now you admin that there are two huge caveats that allow killing, that are neither precise nor objective.

 

I am not hating on the Qu'ran, it is a better book than the Bible in my opinion.

Just as Islam is a more peaceful religion than Christianity (anyone who wants to discuss this, please either pm me or start another thread)

 

I am just pointing out that what you have said twice in this thread is incorrect. As you yourself have pointed out your previous inaccuracies one must ask the question, where you deliberately mis-quoting the Qu'ran to suit your agenda or have you re-read you Qu'ran in the time between both posts and reaslised you were wrong?

 

There's no mistake. There's no misquote.

 

Doesn't the bible also give that caveat, in the same way as the Qur'an?

Thou shalt not kill... but an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life?

 

Both sets of scripture give the same command, and the same caveat.

 

Within my lifetime, there was the same apparent contradiction in the law of the UK... it went against the Queen's peace, to take the life of another...

 

... yet the death penalty was on the statue books as a punishment for those who had committed crimes such as taking the life of another.

 

an oxymoron, you might argue......?

 

But under the law of the UK, pre-1966, a person who had, wilfully and with malice aforethought, killed another person, was considered to have forfeited their own right to live, and that the Death sentence was an option for the presiding Judge to hand down to the convicted.

 

"Thou shalt not kill"- but it was a necessity, indeed a requirement, for those troops who went to fight, during the first and second world wars. The troops concerned were not murderers, under UK law, and, thankfully, were not tried for what they had to do. It was legitimate combat.

[angos]

have you heard the take of the Bibliomancer, who took the bible in such a way, that he let the bible fall open at a random verse, and used this "instruction" to dictate his actions for the day?

 

the first verse was "And Judas took a rope and hanged himself" (Matthew 27)

 

then he took the bible and did this act again, the book then fell open a second time, at the verse "Go thou and do likewise!" (Luke 10 V 37 b)

No

 

 

Both the Bible and the Qur'an are open to the unlearned and unschooled taking a single verse, or quote, out of context, referring to neither the exegesis nor the hermeneutics of the verse or quote and using it to mean practically anything they wish, to justify any idiotic theorem.

 

The Bible and Qur'an can't be compared because one is claimed to be the actual words of God and the other isn't, and any sensible God would surely have had it written so that all its human creations can understand it.

 

 

The secret to understanding the scriptures is to have a grounding in the background and context of the times when the scripture was revealed. For example in the bible, the context of a verse as revealed will refer to whether there was peace or war, whether the Hebrews were living under the rule of a good and Godly king, or a corrupt and disbelieving king.

 

Gods error then, have a book written for men to read and then not giving all men the ability to understand it. What percentage of Muslims would you say don't actually understand the Qur'an.

 

 

In the Qur'an, we have verses revealed when there was peace in the lands, and others revealed when there was trouble and warfare.

There's trouble and warfare now, so the verses about warfare and killing are relevant now and being used by Mulsims to justify killing.

 

 

The Qur'an dictates when it is legal to wage war, and dictates how to wage war, and to treat the captured prisoners of war in a just and humane manner.

 

The condition have been met, making the verses about war relevant.

 

It instructs the soldiers to kill only those whom they are legally permitted to kill, and to cause no harm to those who are not legitimate combatants, such as women, children and the elderly, and that they must not destroy livestock (except that which they have immediate need of, for food) or the infrastructure (roads and buildings).

The two Muslims clearly think it was legally permitted to kill Lee Rigby.

 

the Qur'an tells us what is just cause:- if it is a legitimate death sentence handed down in a court of law, or if it is a "kill-or-be killed" situation, such as clear and present danger to oneself or one's family, or in a legitimate war, (and even then the person killed must be another combatant).

This condition as been met.

 

"Kill them wherever you find them", clearly doesn't mean they have to be a combatant. Wherever you find them could just as easily mean whilst they are asleep in bed.

[charmer]

 

There's no mistake. There's no misquote.

 

Doesn't the bible also give that caveat, in the same way as the Qur'an?

Thou shalt not kill... but an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life?

 

Both sets of scripture give the same command, and the same caveat.

 

Within my lifetime, there was the same apparent contradiction in the law of the UK... it went against the Queen's peace, to take the life of another...

 

... yet the death penalty was on the statue books as a punishment for those who had committed crimes such as taking the life of another.

 

an oxymoron, you might argue......?

 

But under the law of the UK, pre-1966, a person who had, wilfully and with malice aforethought, killed another person, was considered to have forfeited their own right to live, and that the Death sentence was an option for the presiding Judge to hand down to the convicted.

 

"Thou shalt not kill"- but it was a necessity, indeed a requirement, for those troops who went to fight, during the first and second world wars. The troops concerned were not murderers, under UK law, and, thankfully, were not tried for what they had to do. It was legitimate combat.

 

You say there is no mistake and no mis quote, yet there was. You deliberately left out the caveat to promote your opinion that the Qu'ran is a text of peace.

 

You are comparing it to the Bible, I say that is a mistake. The Bible is a foul novel (I was bought up Irish Catholic and have read the bible front to back many times and even copied most of it out as punishment) so you are setting your stall fairly low if you defend the Qu'ran by comparing it to a book like that.

 

I do get the feeling that you are doing so to defend your religion, which you have no need to do. Islam is a religion of peace whereas Christianity (and especially Catholicism) is a religion of conquest and crusade.

 

The issue at hand is does the Qu'ran forbid the taking of human life? No. Do the haddiths? No

 

Regarding the part about UK law, you are right in so far as it does seem somewhat contradictory to take the life of someone as punishment for taking someone else's life. However, the Queen's peace was upheld by the death penalty as it was sanctioned (in theory) by the Queen herself.

 

However, there is a difference. We realised that this was stupid and we changed it. The same needs to happen across the abrahamic family.

[Nagel]

Since when? the Qur'aan states as does the bible "Thou shalt not kill"

 

Does the muslim bible also use the phrase "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"?

 

One of the killers was caught on camera, shown on tonight's BBC news, using this phrase in justification at the scene.