Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift Sword
Sir,
Why is that translation any better than these?:
"So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates."
or, perhaps, if you prefer:
"And when you meet in regular battle those who disbelieve, smite their necks; and, when you have overcome them, by causing great slaughter among them, bind fast the fetters - then afterwards either release them as a favour or by taking ransom - until the war lays down its burdens."
I believe that in both the Indian and the United States armies, it is common, acceptable practice to kill and take prisoners those who you are fighting for no other reason than that they believe in a cause other than yours and are willing to fight for it.
Regards,
William
|
Bill,
I beg to take a different view.
In War, I will buy to some extent what you say. But wars are fought on national policies and not religious one and I am yet to hear of the US or Indian soldiers forgiving enemy soldiers and shaking hands like good friends if they (the enemy) converted to the religion of the soldier's faith.
However, after war?
Do look at history. Indian history would be an ideal place to start!
Try this:
Heard of the Moghul Emperor walling up alive the sons of a Sikh Guru since they did not want to convert?
__________________
"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."
I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.
HAKUNA MATATA