2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Wilders Is Correct on Abrogation

Reader comment on item: The Rushdie Rules, 25 Years Later

Submitted by Mike Ramirez (United States), Nov 9, 2014 at 13:04

Dr. Pipes,

With all due respect, the Islamic example that you cite about "No compulsion in religion" is from Surah 2:256 and this is what all Muslim apologists repeat in their defense to claim that Islam is a tolerant religion. However, as Geert Wilders pointed out in your article, there is the concept of abrogation in Islam where a previously revealed verse is replaced and superseded by one that comes along at a later time.

It has been recorded that Surah 2:256, revealed during Muhammad's time in Medina, was short lived and later replaced (Abrogated) in Medina with more militant and aggressive revelations from Surah 9, one of which states the following: " And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists (Christians) wherever you find them and capture them and beseige them and sit and wait for them in every place in ambush. But if they should repent (convert to Islam) establish prayer and give zakat, then let them go on their way. Indeed Allah is forgiving and merciful." (Qur'an 9:5) This verse has not been abrogated and is still in effect to this day.

Additionally, Qur'an 9:29 literally obligates Muslims to "Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day...nor acknowledge the religion of truth (Islam)...even if they are People of The Book (Jews and Christians) until they pay the Jizyah (tax) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued."

Neither Surah 9:5, nor Surah 9:29 have been abrogated. Until they are, Islam will not change to a "Moderate" form of Islam. A good example is what we see today with Islamic terror groups following the non-abrogated fundamental tenets of the Quran when it comes to dealing wit non-Islamic societies.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Wilders Is Correct on Abrogation by Mike Ramirez

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)