69 million page views


Reader comment on item: The Rushdie Rules, 25 Years Later
in response to reader comment: Wilders Is Correct on Abrogation

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Nov 19, 2014 at 07:06

Hi Michael

You are very correct. However read al-Tabari's tafseer of Q2:256 and his explanation for what is really "no compulsion in religion" and you will be in for a surprise


The reality is there Q2:256 was abrogated by ayat al-sayf or Q9:5 and ayat al-jizya or Q9:29 and this is indeed what Ibn Kathir says and that it was abrogated by ayat al-Qital


But again Muhammad was a poor theologian


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".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2023 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.)