Whenever teabaggers point out violent passages from the Koran...

[Hugabear]

Whenever a teabagger points out some violent passage from the Koran (usually taken out of context or misquoted), simply refer them to the Old Testament in their own Bible.

2 Kings 2:23-24: "And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them."

Deuteronomy 13:13-16: "that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely,both its people and its livestock. You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt"

1 Samuel 15:3-8: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. So Saul summoned the men and mustered them at Telaim--two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand men from Judah ... Then Saul attacked the Amalekites all the way from Havilah to Shur, to the east of Egypt. He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword."

These are just a couple of examples, there are plenty more.

[arcane1]

1. Hosea 13:16 promotes abortion.

But apparently it's OK if you're killing the mother too.

The people of Samaria must bear the consequences of their guilt because they rebelled against their God. They will be killed by an invading army, their little ones dashed to death against the ground, their pregnant women ripped open by swords."

[Igel]

2. That often misses the point.

Take the IS, for example. They have no problem quoting and implementing bits of the Qur'aan. To quote the Qur'aan in discussing the Yezidi is not only appropriate, it's required. Whatever anything else may say--whether the Tanakh or the Lord of the Rings, or even Dr. Seuss--they're simply distractions, a wan attempt to change the subject from something that's embarrassing.

If places like Sa'udi Arabia are silent about what some outsider thinks is a misuse of the Qur'aan, perhaps they have their reasons. Perhaps they don't think it's a misuse. Perhaps they don't want to criticise other Muslims. Perhaps they're busy racing camels. (Yes, in Sa'udi Arabia camel racing is a big deal, with good camel jockeys in high demand.)

When I see a bunch of Israelites rounding up and killing Amalekites and their livestock, I'll worry about the passage you cite because it will then have a modicum of relevance. Come to think of it, I haven't even seen any really rabid Zionists quoting it to propose genocide. I suppose if I look I'll find them; perhaps some of the Kahane folk? Then again, we know who arrested and tried that "great man of Israel" Goldstein. (Hint: That would be the Israelis.)

The closest I've ever seen is some ardent Anglo-Israelism folk who quoted this--and the related passages in which the Israelites failed to destroy some other NW Semitic tribes--wrt the Native Americans. But that was about what others a couple of centuries ago should have done, not what should be done now, or should be done by Christians. (There's a fine line there that they're not crossing.)

It's like the law: It's not the text, it's the interpretation.

And it's not even outsiders' interpretation of what the text *should* mean to insiders or *must* mean to insiders. This is a fairly common mistake--people on both right and left make it. It's what insiders say it means and how they act on it. For many Muslims the war verses in the Qur'aan are pointless. But if you ask the Yezidi, they're very relevant because the IS acts on them. To relative silence.

[CJCRANE]

5. After what we've just witnessed in Gaza

I don't know how you can say that.

Not to mention Bush and Blair's invocation of scripture to justify the Iraq War as well as large parts of the GOP base who believe they are in a war against Islam (like General Boykin) and didn't notice that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

[samsingh]

7. in bush's disgusting war, you didn't have Christians killing themselves and slaughtering

innocent people in an attempt to get into heaven.

[samsingh]

6. exactly. many Christians have evolved from that. IS has not

[CJCRANE]

3. All the Abrahamic religions have the same back story.

I see them all as pretty much the same.

A story of a God of Mercy and Wrath.

I prefer the worshipers who follow the merciful side.

[oberliner]

4. Muslims believe in the OT as well

Both Muslims and Christians believe it to be superseded by the NT and then by the Koran in the case of Muslims.

But all believers of those three faiths view it as the word of God revealed to the prophets.