Leave quotation of sacred texts to theologians

By Haroon SiddiquiEditorial Page

Pastor Terry Jones wanted to burn the Qur’an because he believes it preaches violence. That, in fact, has been an article of faith for critics of Islam post-9/11. “See, it says right here,” they say, pointing to the “Sword Verses,” of which they are a dozen. They quote them selectively, as does Osama bin Laden — he to justify violent jihad, they to demonize Islam.

As with most sacred texts, the Qur’an is open to human interpretation. But there’s consensus among reputable scholars, Muslims and non-Muslims, that the book sanctions war only for defensive purposes. Peace is the norm, not violence and warfare.

The most contentious verse, Slay them wherever you find them, is part of a passage that emphasizes self-defence, not warmongering:

Fight in the way of God against those who fight you, but begin not hostilities; Allah loves not the aggressors. And slay them wherever you find them and expel them from places whence they expelled you, for persecution is worse than slaughter. . . But if they desist, cease hostilities(2:190-93).

Another “sword” verse, Take them and slay them, was revealed when Muslims were being persecuted in seventh century Arabia:

If they leave you alone and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them;(but) if they withdraw not from you nor offer you peace, then take them and slay them wherever you find them (4:90-91).

Another injunction, Fight the leaders of unbelief, has a qualifier:

If they break their pledges after their covenant (with you) and assail your religion, then fight the leaders of unbelief (9:12).

Another verse concerning fighting comes in the context of the right of both Muslims and non-Muslims to practise their religion.

Leave is given to those who fight, because they have been wronged . . . (and) expelled from their homes unjustly only for saying, ‘Our Lord is God.’ Had it not been for God repelling some men by means of others, churches, oratories and mosques . . . would surely have been pulled down (22:39-40).

Islamic tradition also holds that the “sword verses” were, in fact, overtaken by others revealed later when peace prevailed between Muslims and non-Muslims. Thus the Qur’anic exhortations to avoid war altogether, limit warfare, and, if attacked, to respond only proportionately, protecting civilians and not mutilating the dead:

Warfare is an awesome evil (2:217).

If your enemy inclines toward peace, then you, too, should seek peace (8:61).

Some of the 9/11 hijackers were said to have cited a verse calling on the believers to slay the idolaters. Here’s the full quote:

When the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them (captive), and ambush them. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due (charity), then let them go free (9:5).

“Just as Old Testament passages regarding violence and warfare need to be understood as a response to a specific historical situation, so too the Qur’an,” says John Esposito, professor of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

In fact, Philip Jenkins, professor of religion at Penn State University and author of Jesus Wars and Dark Passages, has argued that “the scriptures in the Qur’an are far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible. There’s a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide.”

In the first book of Samuel, God instructs King Saul to attack the Amalekites: “And utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them,” God says through Samuel. “But kill man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” When Saul failed to do that, God took away his kingdom.

“In other words, Saul has committed a dreadful sin by failing to complete genocide. And that passage echoes through Christian history,” Jenkins has said.

All these issues are best left to theologians and historians. But, lately, they’ve become part of our public discourse. In that context, it’s useful to remember that religions have always been used for both good and evil; that people in a democracy are free to practise their faith — within the rule of secular law; and that those violating the law, for religious or other reasons, will have the book thrown at them.

These are statements of the obvious but they bear repeating in these highly charged times.