Malik, I know you enjoy my responses—may Allah open your heart to the truth. He can still guide you back, if He wills. Truly, you were misinformed. But who knows? You may still return.
You claimed that we Muslims selectively read the Qur’ān, ignoring certain parts. That is simply false, and you know it. I challenge you to mention any sitting of Tafsīr, in Ramaḍān or otherwise, where scholars skip verses. You won’t find one. You are being deliberately mischievous.
Also, bring me a Tafsīr book where the exegete omits a verse because of its message. Again, you will fail.
And what about the boys and girls who memorize the entire Qur’ān? Are they told to skip verses? Never.
Malik, fight the Shayṭān within you.
Now to the real issue: Qur’ān 47:4:
“So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds. Then either [set them free] graciously or ransom them until war lays down its burdens. That is the command. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah—never will He waste their deeds.”
You objected to interpreting this verse in the context of warfare. Then I ask you: In what context was it revealed?
Muslims spent 13 years in Makkah without raising a single hand in violence. But when they migrated to Madinah and established a state, warfare became a necessity for survival.
If you question why Allah, the Most Merciful, allowed warfare for Muslims, we ask: Why did He permit it for David, Solomon, and others in the Torah?
Deuteronomy 20:16–17:
“But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: But thou shalt utterly destroy them... as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.”
1 Samuel 15:2–3:
“...Go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have. Spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
Numbers 31:17–18:
“Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.”
These are explicit divine commands for total annihilation, even of children and animals. No wonder Zionists have acted ruthlessly in Gaza.
In Islam, only combatants are targeted except in some few cases of collateral damage.
You cited groups like Boko Haram, ISIS, and al-Qaeda as representations of Islamic warfare. That shows your ignorance. These groups are widely known to be CIA and Mossad creations. Dispute that here if you dare.
Islamic wars were fundamentally defensive, with a few pre-emptive strikes against clear threats.
Centuries before the West drafted the Geneva Conventions (1949), Islam had already established ethical rules of war:
❝Do not kill any woman or child.❞— Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (1744)
❝Do not mutilate (the bodies of the dead).❞ — Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (2474), Abū Dāwūd (2667)
❝You will find people secluded in monasteries—leave them and what they worship.❞— Musnad Aḥmad (17157)
❝Do not cut down trees or destroy buildings.❞ — Musnad Aḥmad (2346)
❝Do not kill sheep or camels except for food.❞— Musnad Aḥmad (2346)
❝Do not kill the one who flees, and do not finish off the wounded.❞— Abū Dāwūd (2614)
❝Treat the captives well.❞— Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (3769)
❝Do not act treacherously, nor be excessive, nor mutilate.❞— Muslim (1731)
❝Whoever oppresses a Mu‘āhad (non-Muslim under protection)... I will be his opponent on the Day of Judgment.❞— Abū Dāwūd (3052)
This would shock your audience, Malik. You’ve fed them lies for too long.
You claimed that the Fulani bandits learned kidnapping from the Qur’ān. Seriously? Have you forgotten Evans, the Igbo man notorious for high-profile kidnappings in Nigeria?
Google it: Evans was collecting ransoms long before any Fulani did the same.
As for Islamic law, kidnappers and violent criminals fall under the ruling of ḥirābah (armed robbery, terrorism, etc.).
Surah al-Mā’idah (5:33):
“Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land is none but that they be killed, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or be exiled from the land...”
The word "yuḥāribūna" refers to crimes like: Highway robbery, Banditry, Terrorism, Murder and plunder.
Do you also think this punishment is too harsh? Allah, the One who will burn disbelievers eternally in Hell, is also the Most Merciful to His believing slaves.
So when the obedient slaves of Allah meet His rebellious slaves in battle, they are permitted to be harsh, to protect the earth from corruption. But once the threat is subdued, Islam offers mercy, ransom, or execution, just as the Nuremberg Trials executed Nazi war criminals after WWII.
Can you see the wisdom in Islamic law now?
Olodo ọmọ — let that pain you again and again.
Click here for other responses to the fellow.
