Bali Bombers Used Quran Laws of Retaliation

[Narnian]

The Bali Bombers are due to be executed next month. A western jounalist interviewed one of them in his prison and asked him where it says in the Quran that he can kill innocents. Here is his reply:

"I know better than you because I am Muslim and you are kaffir (infidel). You kaffir know nothing," Samudra replies, waving his hand at the reporter.

"The verse, blood by blood, soul by soul. Your country - US, UK, Australia alliance - already killing my people," he says.

He was quoting this verse from the Quran as justification for the bombings, and he is right because, according to Allah, since the "countries" he mentions above haven't paid any charity money then killing innocents is justified by this verse, if we are to believe the Quran is infallible:

002:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. And for him who is forgiven somewhat by his (injured) brother, prosecution according to usage and payment unto him in kindness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom.

005:045 And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are wrong-doers.

That is why 25% of muslims on average, the world over, believe in killing innocents for the sake of Islam: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/26/where...e-muslim-world

But Jesus said this: Matthew 5: 38 "You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.

I look forward to your feedback

[mudcake]

The Bali Bombers are due to be executed next month. A western jounalist interviewed one of them in his prison and asked him where it says in the Quran that he can kill innocents. Here is his reply:

"I know better than you because I am Muslim and you are kaffir (infidel). You kaffir know nothing," Samudra replies, waving his hand at the reporter.

"The verse, blood by blood, soul by soul. Your country - US, UK, Australia alliance - already killing my people," he says.

He was quoting this verse from the Quran as justification for the bombings, and he is right because, according to Allah, since the "countries" he mentions above haven't paid any charity money then killing innocents is justified by this verse, if we are to believe the Quran is infallible:

002:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. And for him who is forgiven somewhat by his (injured) brother, prosecution according to usage and payment unto him in kindness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom.

005:045 And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are wrong-doers.

That is why 25% of muslims on average, the world over, believe in killing innocents for the sake of Islam: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/26/where...e-muslim-world

But Jesus said this: Matthew 5: 38 "You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.

I look forward to your feedback

....lol... what feedback narnny.!!!!..you have yet to substantiate, using proper Islamic exegesis/literary context, to support your dubious and miscontrued claims and assertions that these Quranic verses you quote advocate killing INNOCENT people...lol... I didn't read anything about killing innocent in these verses....i must of missed it mate...lol....

Looking forward to your feedback...

muddy from downunder...lol.......

[penguinfan]

You would have to define who is innocent first off. The Bali bombers blew up night clubs full of foreigners who were spreading corruption in Muslim lands by freely mixing between the sexes, drinking alcohol, and presumably engaging in pre/extra marital intercourse,

The Qur'an is quite clear that those people should be "dealt" with. Your argument would be that vigilantism is not allowed in Islam, and only the Caliph can declare jihad, but you do not need a Caliph to declare defensive jihad - which is what these young men were doing when they bombed these mischief makers in +Muslim+ lands.

[Ibn Abu Talib]

penguinfan thinks he knows everything about Islam after reading Watt's books!

If you didn't already know, Watt believes the Quran is God's word.

You would have to define who is innocent first off. The Bali bombers blew up night clubs full of foreigners who were spreading corruption in Muslim lands by freely mixing between the sexes, drinking alcohol, and presumably engaging in pre/extra marital intercourse,

The Qur'an is quite clear that those people should be "dealt" with. Your argument would be that vigilantism is not allowed in Islam, and only the Caliph can declare jihad, but you do not need a Caliph to declare defensive jihad - which is what these young men were doing when they bombed these mischief makers in +Muslim+ lands.

The Quran is quite clear on this, penguin.

[060:008] God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for God loveth those who are just.

[060:009] God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.

Those foreigners were not spreading mischief since they were confined to a particular location. Besides, Bali is predominantly Hindu.

The bombers were acting in self defense? I expect such stupidity from Narnian, not from you. See the verses I quoted above.

[mudcake]

You would have to define who is innocent first off. The Bali bombers blew up night clubs full of foreigners who were spreading corruption in Muslim lands by freely mixing between the sexes, drinking alcohol, and presumably engaging in pre/extra marital intercourse,

The Qur'an is quite clear that those people should be "dealt" with. Your argument would be that vigilantism is not allowed in Islam, and only the Caliph can declare jihad, but you do not need a Caliph to declare defensive jihad - which is what these young men were doing when they bombed these mischief makers in +Muslim+ lands.

"defensive Jihad"...on non threatening, non combatants in an non islamic state/country .!!???...lol.... subhanAllah, Ibn Abu Talib, I still have hope that penguinfan will repudiate from his ignorant assertion and stupid comments here and show some humility..but narnny on the other hand ....subhanAllah!!!!..lol...

[Narnian]

Those foreigners were not spreading mischief since they were confined to a particular location.

The Bali bomber was referring to this verse:

002:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female.

This verse does not stipulate that you are to kill "those who are killing you or driving you from your homes". It says you are to repay equally. If x number of their women were killed by infidels, then you are to kill equal number of infidel women. If x number of slaves were killed, then you are to kill equal number of slaves on their side. If Shia bombs 100 Sunnis, then Sunnis kill 100 Shia, and so on.

That is exactly what the Bali bomber was doing. X number of people were killed in Bagdad by the infidels, so he kills x number of infidels.

It's in your Quran!

[mudcake]

The Bali bomber was referring to this verse:

002:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female.

This verse does not stipulate that you are to kill "those who are killing you or driving you from your homes". It says you are to repay equally. If x number of their women were killed by infidels, then you are to kill equal number of infidel women. If x number of slaves were killed, then you are to kill equal number of slaves on their side. If Shia bombs 100 Sunnis, then Sunnis kill 100 Shia, and so on.

That is exactly what the Bali bomber was doing. X number of people were killed in Bagdad by the infidels, so he kills x number of infidels.

It's in your Quran!

...lol... Narnny you are as deluded as the bali bombers mate. The literary context of the Quranic verses are not advocating/refrring to war ethics of Jihad and how to deal with casualties of war caused by the enemy.

"O ye who believe! the law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, this is a concession and a Mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. "

The Quranic verses are dealing with the social issues regarding the law and legislation of equality in punishment when one is guilty of a crime of committing murder and the preferred option to accept the blood money for intentional murder.

Here is something for you to think about our confused mate.

The men and women who were killed by the bali bombers were not guilty for committing acts of intentional murder.They were innocent! Killing innocent men and women would be exceeding the limits prescribed by Allah narnnyThe ignorant and miscontrued interpretation both you and the bali bombers share regarding the Quranic verses is completely false and against both the literary context and application of the laws stipulated in these verses.

Furthermore it is prohibited for innocent women and children to be killed according to Islamic principles of Jihad and war ethics.

InshaAllah, are you slowly starting to realize that your miscontrued interpretation and erroneous assertions are fiction conjectured in your confused mind yet mate

[Ibn Abu Talib]

Those foreigners were not spreading mischief since they were confined to a particular location.

The Bali bomber was referring to this verse:

002:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female.

This verse does not stipulate that you are to kill "those who are killing you or driving you from your homes". It says you are to repay equally. If x number of their women were killed by infidels, then you are to kill equal number of infidel women. If x number of slaves were killed, then you are to kill equal number of slaves on their side. If Shia bombs 100 Sunnis, then Sunnis kill 100 Shia, and so on.

That is exactly what the Bali bomber was doing. X number of people were killed in Bagdad by the infidels, so he kills x number of infidels.

It's in your Quran!

you uneducated fool! the law of retaliation applies under certain conditions. first, you need an islamic to enforce it. second, retaliation is only against the transgressors. unlike christianity, a man is not allowed to retaliate against a person's son if wrong was committed against him by the son's father. third, although not related to the pertinent law, suicide is haraam in islam. if suicide is haram, suicide bombing is even greater of a sin.

[barnasha]

you uneducated fool! the law of retaliation applies under certain conditions. first, you need an islamic to enforce it. second, retaliation is only against the transgressors. unlike christianity, a man is not allowed to retaliate against a person's son if wrong was committed against him by the son's father. third, although not related to the pertinent law, suicide is haraam in islam. if suicide is haram, suicide bombing is even greater of a sin.

don't insult them... they are just ill informed. like the terrorists.

[Ibn Abu Talib]

and as mudcake pointed out, this law has nothing to do with war.

[Ibn Abu Talib]

don't insult them... they are just ill informed. like the terrorists.

as for narnian, she is worse than an animal. as Allah says in the Quran

[098:006] Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures.

[barnasha]

as for narnian, she is worse than an animal. as Allah says in the Quran

[098:006] Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures.

I don't think so. I think - I hope - she is fighting for what she thinks is right. That in itself is a noble quality.

God will be the judge of us all... so those who take this seriously will be guided.

[penguinfan]

penguinfan thinks he knows everything about Islam after reading Watt's books!

If you didn't already know, Watt believes the Quran is God's word.



The Quran is quite clear on this, penguin.

[060:008] God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for God loveth those who are just.

[060:009] God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.

Those foreigners were not spreading mischief since they were confined to a particular location. Besides, Bali is predominantly Hindu.

The bombers were acting in self defense? I expect such stupidity from Narnian, not from you. See the verses I quoted above.

No, not at all. I have previously said that understanding English translations of the Qur'an is about as clear as mud to me. I also don't understand you method of Qur'anic exegesis. Shouldn't the historical context in which these verses were revealed take precedence over what the Ayahs in one part of the Qur'an say, especially when the circumstances and the people that the verses refer to are different, ie. Polytheists usually refer to the people of Quraish, but later passages dealing with polytheists, such as 9:5 are dealing with people who were not from Muhammad's tribe or clan (and the same tribe as the muhijourun), therefore, these verses dealing with people Muhammad was not familiar with or had very few connections to, are often harsher than the ones directed against Muhammad's own tribe.

[barnasha]

Shouldn't the historical context in which these verses were revealed take precedence over what the Ayahs in one part of the Qur'an say, especially when the circumstances and the people that the verses refer to are different, ie. Polytheists usually refer to the people of Quraish, but later passages dealing with polytheists, such as 9:5 are dealing with people who were not from Muhammad's tribe or clan (and the same tribe as the muhijourun), therefore, these verses dealing with people Muhammad was not familiar with or had very few connections to, are often harsher than the ones directed against Muhammad's own tribe.

I'm not sure I understand your question exactly, but it sounds like a very good question, that shows an understanding of the intricacy involved in a proper exegesis of the revelations in the Quran (or even the books in the bible)

Not only must we reconcile different parts which seem harsher than others (i.e. in dealing with 'polytheists'), but we must reconcile it with the corpus as a whole - in otherwords, there are more basic principles that must be taken into account (e.g.: being good, not doing evil, etc).

[Ibn Abu Talib]

No, not at all. I have previously said that understanding English translations of the Qur'an is about as clear as mud to me. I also don't understand you method of Qur'anic exegesis. Shouldn't the historical context in which these verses were revealed take precedence over what the Ayahs in one part of the Qur'an say, especially when the circumstances and the people that the verses refer to are different, ie. Polytheists usually refer to the people of Quraish, but later passages dealing with polytheists, such as 9:5 are dealing with people who were not from Muhammad's tribe or clan (and the same tribe as the muhijourun), therefore, these verses dealing with people Muhammad was not familiar with or had very few connections to, are often harsher than the ones directed against Muhammad's own tribe.

stick to the topic. prove to me how the atrocity carried out by the bali bombers constituted a defensive jihad when there was not even a war to begin with.