A Message To Peaceful Muslims

Tuesday

On CitizenWarrior.com and other sites, I've seen many comments by Muslims trying to tell non-Muslims that Islam is really a peaceful religion and that the terrorists have it all wrong. A friend of mine I've known for years is an ex-Muslim, who grew up in a Muslim country, and even he has told me Islamic terrorists don't understand the "true" teachings of Islam.

This article is my response. This is a message to Muslims who want to convince non-Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace.

My main message is: Please stop. We are trying to defeat the Jihadis here, and when you tell non-Muslims that message, you aren't helping the cause. You're actually hindering it. I'll explain how in a minute.

If you peaceful Muslims are trying to defend your religious beliefs, I think most people would understand and sympathize with your motives. But by doing it here, what have you accomplished? Have you helped our cause (thwarting Islam's relentless encroachment)? No. All you've done is try to convince us Islam is great.

You need to understand the effect of your defense on the non-Muslim mind. If you want to end Islamic terrorism, and if you understood what effect you had, you would stop defending your faith to infidels.

Because even if we all believed you, so what? Even if you successfully convinced us Islam is really a religion of peace, what difference would it make? Does it help us defeat Jihadis? No, not at all. We have terrorists quoting the Koran (urging Muslims to kill infidels) and we have other Muslims saying the Koran is only about peace. Where does that leave us? You've replaced clarity with confusion. You've replaced resolve with hesitation. And to that degree, you've given Jihadis the upper hand.

This is a deadly serious business, and this seemingly insignificant issue is the crucial pivoting point. Knowing how and why your enemy wants to destroy you is an enormous advantage in a global war in which many hundreds of thousands have already lost their lives.

Peaceful Muslims, I ask you to hear this: You make non-Muslims less able to defend themselves by going on these websites and justifying your religion to them.

Part of what makes the issue confusing for westerners is that we don't know if you're sincere or if you're trying to deceive us. Many terrorists exclaim vehemently that Islam is a religion of peace. But when they say it, they are trying to trick non-Muslims and confuse us while they continue their jihad against us (or what they mean is: as soon as Islam conquers all countries, the world will be at peace, so therefore, Islam is a religion of peace).

But my feeling is that most of the Muslims who have written to me are actually sincere, peace-loving, non-terrorist Muslims who have no interest in blowing up infidels. My friend is one of those. He is perfectly sincere.

If you are one of those sincerely peaceful Muslims, I know you have explained away the violent parts of the Koran terrorists often quote. And good for you. I'm glad you have. You had a teacher who convinced you jihad is really an inner struggle. And that's great. The teacher provided you with the complex mental maneuvers you need to see the Koran as a peaceful document. Thank you for ignoring the violent parts of Islamic teachings, and I hope you always will.

But you are doing harm and causing confusion by telling infidels you know the "true teachings" of Islam. The Jihadis aren't listening to unorthodox teachers. Jihadis are fundamentalists. They are strongly against any moderation or editing or modernizing of Islamic texts.

It doesn't really matter that you have somehow explained away Allah's commands to kill all the infidels — the Jihadis have not explained it away! They make the more direct assumption that if Allah said it, He must have meant it.

You think the Jihadis who quote the Koran are wrong. And you believe the fundamentalists running Iran, Syria, Pakistan, the Sudan, and Saudi Arabia don't really know what Islam is all about. Okay, fine. Does that help us defeat terrorism now that we know that? Not one little bit.

But when infidels get a good idea of what is actually in the Koran, and when they learn about the Islamic principles of deceit and pretext, and when we find out the goal and purpose of the Islamic faith, and when we learn about the methods Jihadis use to infiltrate and destroy, then we infidels are better able to protect ourselves. It's like finding out the plans of an enemy during war. It helps tremendously to anticipate what they're going to do and to understand their motives. This knowledge improves our ability to defend ourselves against it.

But when a seemingly sincere Muslim comes along and says no, that's not the "true" Islam and you've got it all wrong, many infidels will be confused and not know what to believe, so they will take no action. A confused mind is hesitant to act. They will not know the best way to proceed, and they'll be like a deer in headlights, frozen and paralyzed with uncertainty.

The reason non-Muslims are so easily confused is that most of us don't realize the difference between the Koran and every other religious book we are familiar with. The Christian Bible is a collection of writings from various authors, written sometimes hundreds of years apart, with parables, laws, advice, history, and dreams, all collected together into one book. Those of us in the West who are not Christians are still familiar enough with these religions to know this much, and to assume the same is true of the Koran.

But as you are fully aware, the Koran is one book, written by one man in his own lifetime. It can be (and often is) taken quite literally, and is obviously meant to be taken literally (I've read the Koran myself cover-to-cover). It isn't full of symbolism or vague analogies. It is mostly direct commands.

The Koran contains contradictory statements like other religious books, but the Koran itself provides the reader with a way to know what to do with contradictions. In the Koran, it says if you have two passages that contradict each other, the one written later supersedes the one written earlier. A passage written later abrogates (makes null and void) passages written earlier that contradict it. It says so right there in the Koran.

Most westerners don't know this. And they are unaware that the peaceful, tolerant passages were written early in Mohammad's prophetic career. According to the Koran, those passages have been overwritten by later, more violent, less tolerant passages.

So when most westerners hear Jihadis quoting violent passages from the Koran, and then peaceful Muslims quoting peaceful passages, they interpret that the way they would if someone was quoting the Christian Bible. They think to themselves, "Oh, there must be many different and contradictory passages, like there are in other religious books, so Muslims can pick and choose what they like, and justify whatever actions they want to take."

Of course, you Muslims know the Koran is nothing like that. There is no picking and choosing. The Koran itself says very explicitly and in no uncertain terms that a Muslim must not alter or ignore any part of its very clear and direct message or they will burn in a fiery torment forever.

If you don't like me saying all this, I am truly sorry, but we non-Muslims need to know what's really happening. This is too serious to be overly concerned with tiptoeing around anyone's feelings.

I'm trying to tell my fellow westerners what Islamic terrorists are up to. They are following the Koran to the letter, as it says in the Koran a faithful Muslim must do. And their overarching goal is to make an Islamic state out of every country in the world. And the Koran tells them in no uncertain terms that they are justified in using violence, deceit, and pretext to accomplish their holy duty. My fellow westerners need to know this or they are fish in a barrel — vulnerable and defenseless.

In the Koran, Allah makes it clear that man-made governments (such as a democracy) and free speech (such as criticizing the Koran) are abominations and must be eliminated.

Right now, Muslims are immigrating into our western democracies holding and cherishing these values and goals, and most of my fellow westerners are completely naive about it. One of the reasons they are so naive is that peaceful Muslims keep trying to defend their interpretation of the Koran as the "real" interpretation.

Think about this. Who is better able to defend themselves from a determined and deadly enemy?

1. A person who believes the enemy is peaceful? or...

2. A person who knows the plans, intentions, and motivations of the enemy, and knows his tactics?

Obviously, number two will be more capable of protecting themselves. And all the plans, motivations, intentions (and many of the tactics) of today's Jihadis can be found in the Koran.

Our situation puts both infidels and peaceful Muslims in a difficult position. It's not your fault, and it's not our fault. We've been put in this position by those who wage violent jihad against the West.

Partly because of your messages, and partly because my fellow westerners aren't taking the time to read the Koran for themselves, they are confused by all these seemingly contradictory messages. Is Islam a religion of peace or isn't it? What's the real story? Is this all propaganda? Is it prejudice and hatred? Is this bigotry? Islamophobia? And westerners will default to assuming Islam must be a religion of peace, because they believe all religions are really peaceful.

What should you peaceful Muslims do when you want to argue against a non-Muslim? What can you do when you want to defend your peaceful version of Islam?

The first thing you can do is make it clear to us infidels that you are a believer in a new, modified form of Islam. You can tell us yes, there are many passages in the Koran that encourage violence against infidels but you think these passages should be ignored by modern Muslims. That would really help clarify things for non-Muslims. Be out front about it.

You can also openly criticize Jihadis for not moderating or modernizing the teachings of Mohammad. This would help all the non-Muslims understand what is happening and who we should consider enemies and friends. It would help non-Muslims understand the "civil war" going on within Islam itself.

You should quote the violent passages and say you think all Muslims should ignore those passages.

I know it takes courage to openly criticize either the Jihadis or the Koran. You're putting your own life at risk, no matter where you live (because the penalty for criticizing the religion of peace is death). It is much easier to defend your beliefs by justifying your religion to infidels. But that doesn't solve the problem. It makes things worse.

If you are committed to defeating Islamic terrorism while at the same time justifying your version of Islam, you can expend your energy convincing young Muslim men to follow your way rather than the Jihadis' way. Right now, Jihadis are successfully persuading young men to follow the strict Islamic (violent) path. What can you do to recruit young men to your path? That has a chance of actually solving the problem.

I said earlier it doesn't really matter that you have explained away the violent passages of the Koran (because terrorists haven't) but that's not entirely true. In a way, it does matter, and it is wonderful that you have modified the Koran's teachings to be more peaceful.

But to end the cycle, you'll have to go one step further and declare outright that the Koran is not the word of Allah. If you've modified or ignored any part of the Koran, you're acting as if it is not the perfect word of Allah. So admit it openly.

If you secretly admit the Koran is not perfect, but keep saying it is perfect, you open the way for the next generation of Muslims to rebel against your "modified" teachings by becoming fundamentalists. They will see you as a hypocrite who says "the Koran is perfect," but who ignores half of the teachings.

Please think about this. You must try to understand that as a westerner, when we look at the problem of Islamic terrorism, it looks like a large number of militant factions, all with different names and goals and grievances, and there is no clear idea of what is going on or what to do about it, or even how to approach the problem.

But each of the different Islamic factions are all using the same book. They are basing their goals on what is in that book. They are using the methods described in the book. What they are willing to do and how they will do it is all based on what is in that book.

Infidels can look in the book and discover what they're up to, what their motives are, and what specific tactics they'll use. Those of us trying to defeat or at least reduce terrorist incidents are trying to alert our fellow non-Muslims about the situation. And if everyone knew about it — if all the non-Muslims simply read the Koran cover-to-cover — they would suddenly understand the situation in a whole new way, and Islamic terrorism would be in serious danger of extinction from that point on.

But your message to non-Muslims basically tells us: The answer is not in the Koran. Look anywhere else for answers. Just don't look in the Koran.

And what has happened? Non-Muslims don't know what to do or where to look for answers. And to that degree, you, the peaceful Muslims, have helped the Jihadis do their job, even if you didn't mean to. You've helped perpetuate violence in the world. Jihadis will keep immigrating into western democracies with their murderous plans while the non-Muslims are unaware of what's happening — blinded and confused by their own multiculturalism combined with your constant assurances that Islam really is a religion of peace.

The Jihadis will keep expressing their different grievances (as pretexts for war) and the hand-wringing, kind-hearted westerners will keep trying to make concessions, never suspecting they are being duped with a vengeance. And the violence and political invasion will go on and on.

We've got to stop it, and you peaceful Muslims are one of the keys to our success. That's the end of my message to peaceful Muslims.

I have a message for you non-Muslims, as well. You should do your best to read the Koran yourself. This would really help you clarify the situation.

And finally, I have a message to those deceitful Jihadis who try to convince us Islam is a religion of peace. When enough people know about your plans and methods, your deceit will no longer work. Scams and cons lose their effectiveness once they are well-known. Your days are numbered. We will reveal your plans. We will choke off your sources of money. We will help give Koran-modifying Muslims a voice. And you will have to stop blowing things up and get a real job.

91 comments:

snowman 2:43 PM  

Wow. Excellent article. I hope 'moderate' Muslims read it. I'll link to this from my blog. Everybody interested in our current war should read it.

Citizen Warrior 12:45 AM  

Thank you, snowman.

Now I have something to send every time I get an email or comment from a Muslim trying to quote me chapter and verse and explaining how the Koran really is all about peace. I was hoping to write something all of us could use.

Pastorius 5:54 AM  

Great job, CW. I'm with Snowman on this.

Amillennialist 12:49 AM  

Excellent post.

Here's some fuel for the fire:

http://amillennialist.blogspot.com/
2004/07/allah-and-his-false-prophet-
command.html

Anonymous 12:30 PM  

Pleading to moderate Muslims to effectively denounce their Holy Book, will never work. Why, precisely because they are still Muslims and can utilize the option of Ta Takiyya where considered appropriate whether out of devotion, enforced loyalty as a result of ultimatum or genuine attempts at deception based on hate of the Infidel. (Incidently, the word ' Infidel' really means a Muslim, originally coined by the Christian Crusaders). We need to take it back.

Furthermore, it is not possible to discard sections of one's Holy Book and retain others.

Either the whole belief system is discarded or it is reinforced in its entirety.

Sorry, the only way to defeat an enemy is to play it at its own game. The end result being to instil fear and brutal repression.

Ask yourself, how did this theocracy arrive at its present state of potency?

Citizen Warrior 1:55 PM  

I'd say the best way to defeat an enemy is to use everything at our disposal, including repression, the use of force, the education and motivation of people on OUR side, and the conversion of whoever is on the other side but on the fence, legal means, political action, persuasion of our friends, dialog and conversation among us to clarify the issue, etc.

My Small Piece of the World 6:23 PM  

we can look at it any way we want. but truth be told we are in a holy war. We are not without sin here, our forebears helped create this.
All in the name of what was right at the time, or most politically expedient.
The monster is created now like it or not we must kill it. Its ideology literally,metaphorically and quite possibly physically... there will be blood and our hands wont stay clean...

Surind Raj 7:50 AM  

I like you CW. Honestly... you write very well. Among the better ones I have come across.

Keep up the good work.

I will be referencing some of your works in the future, hope you don't mind. Will link back.

Surind Raj 7:53 AM  

Oh yes... here is a related article about what happens in "so called" moderate Malaysia.

http://surind.blogspot.com/2008/02/malaysias-moderate-islam-means-racism.html

Citizen Warrior 12:55 PM  

Thank you, Surind Raj. I don't mind at all.

Thorum 7:23 AM  

Great article!! Keep up the fight!!

Anonymous 9:57 AM  

Moderate Muslims? No such thing,they are all part of the same sick organism.The only way to deal with a disease is to destroy it,as soon as possible.No mercy to the Muslim invaders!!!

Surind Raj 12:56 AM  

(Linkback)
http://surind.blogspot.com/2009/06/tehran-univesity-students-abused-killed.html

Surind Raj 11:55 AM  

Linkback:
"Islam & Islamic Terrorism in Australia & the (so called) Moderate Australian Muslims"
http://surind.blogspot.com/2009/08/islam-islamic-terrorism-jihad-in.html

Surind Raj 10:36 PM  

(Linkback) & interesting topic & kinda similiar discussion/debate going on here:

http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/2009/08/few-samples-of-quranic-contradictions.html

Anonymous 5:07 AM  

Dear Surind Raj
I can't find, in my copy of the Koran, anything like your statement "A passage written later abrogates passages written earlier that contradict it." Nor does the Koran even give any dates to any of its chapters. Please quote the chapter and verse of the Koran where you claim this statement occurs.

Surind Raj 7:20 AM  

Dear Anonymous et. all,

Please note that I am not the founder of, or writer in this blog.

Moving, on. Some/many of your answers and queries (for everyone) about this issue, can be found at the links below. I have included links from Islamic websites as well, in an attempt to be fair and open.

For the non biased (basically non-Muslims/religious, cause we all know whom full of bias/& selective thinking these people are), and those non-taqiyya (agents of deceit, manipulation, confusion) practising Muslims, they will see the truths for themselves.... and realise why religion(especially Islam), is the worst thing we can give the idiots of every generation.

http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/quran.htm#H

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/abrogatedverses.html

http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Farooq_Ibrahim/abrogation.htm

http://blog.minaret.org/?p=217

http://www.mostmerciful.com/abrogation-and-substitution.htm


I have also included 3 links here, about Islam & apostasy & Jihad. Those with developed mental faculties reading this, will also be able to see why "this" is a very dangerous thing to put in the hands of the idiots born in every generation - basically the extremists, fundamentalists, those with great ambitions of power (politics, ummahs, etc.).

http://talkislam.info/2009/08/18/the-bizarre-hadith-of-bukhari-and-abu-da/

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/012-apostasy.htm

http://www.newsmax.com/tawfik_hamid/islam_jihad_muslims_/2009/09/01/254881.html

Anonymous 3:49 AM  

Dear Surind Raj, OR the writer of the claim that the Koran states ""A passage written later abrogates passages written earlier that contradict it." or ANYONE:

No thanks I don't want to wade thru half a dozen websites. I asked a very simple question - what is the Chapter and verse number of this statement which you claim is in the Koran?

Your evasion is apparently an admission that the claim is false. I suggest you remove it if you want readers to give any credibility to this site.

Btw I am a Christian, not a Muslim as you presumed.

Citizen Warrior 1:09 PM  

Anonymous, the chapter you're looking for is Sura 2, verse 106. It says, "Whenever We abrogate a verse, or cause it to be forgotten, We will bring a better one, or one similar to it. Don't you know that Allah is capable of doing all things?"

Muslim scholars down through the ages have used this verse to sort out the contradictory statements in the Qur'an. They know the order of the Surahs. They know in what order they were written. So when they come across a passage that contradicts another passage, they simply look to see which was written later. The later one overwrites the earlier one when they are in conflict. It's pretty simple and straightforward.

Here is more about abrogation: Definition of Abrogation.

Surind Raj 8:16 PM  

Those words quoted by CW, were right on the top of the 1st or 2nd link I sent ya.

Honestly, I wonder what are your motivations/intention in asking that question & I doubt & have my speculations about your background as well... btw, I'm a Pastafarian! (so what!)

Bottom line, is that Islam (& people, prophets, leaders, mullahs, teachers, etc. attached to it) has its violent parts/values/philosophies/dogma, and any scholar of comparitive religion will tell you that.

I should know, as I did that for my undergrad and have gone through hundreds of books in my lifetime.

There is nothing in the Qu'ran about stoning for example, but there is nothing that condemns/bans or says it is wrong either. Either way it is still prevalent in many Muslim/Islamic nations & states. Below the surface, it is ultimately all about authority, control/wealth/feudalism, power, fear, manipulation, etc.

Citizen Warrior 1:12 AM  

...and the example of Mohammad.

Anonymous 4:38 PM  

In response to an Internet article about the Fort Hood killings recently a Muslim posted the following. My response to him is in the comment after this.

It is easy to bash Islam with such senseless Murderous incident, However... The Quran does not tell Muslims to hurt non Muslims. This guy is nuts, not to excuse him. But there are Muslim nuts.. hundreds or may be thousands. But there are 1.3 billion muslim in this world. I mean the radicals are about .000001 as a percent.
Do not forget the oppression, torture, misery most Muslim live under.
It is impossible to change some peoples views. Every thing that can be said about muslims will go through a filter of prejudice.
I am Muslim. I am an observant muslim but have no desire to hurt anybody. When Jews escaped persecutioni Europe, many found refuge among Muslims in Turkey and Morocco. The prophet Mohammad formed an alliance with Christians and Jews. There are large Christians (such as copts in Egypt) minorities who lived in Muslim countries forever. They did not kill them. according to the commonly accepted narrative about Muslims.
You are reading Translation of the Quran, many are deliberately distorted to enforce Anti Muslim "Narrative" about Islam propagated by people who colonized Africa and Mideast to "educate" Muslims. Many Quranic citations taken out of context. Of course there Muslim criminals and crazies like all other groups. But the Quran did not tell me to kill my American friends, I lived here for twenty five years. I wish my Non muslim friends happy holiday each Christmas. I go to their homes, door to door. A couple of million Muslims live in the US. My Father in law was a proud Marine. Two Hundred of us died in the 9/11 WTC attack. Tens of us joined the military after 9/11 and many died for America. Stop the prejudice. It does not help.

Anonymous 4:40 PM  

MY Reply to previous comment:

Peaceia85, as inoffensive and pleasant as your Alternet ID sounds, you are delusional, an apologist, and are allowing the floodgates of hate that thrive under the veil of Islam to remain, flourish, and fester with your arbitrary, unproven, totally improvised statistical data and misinformation. In addition, you completely miss the true source of the misery suffered by and inflicted upon Muslims, the religion itself. As long as you can control 1.3 billion and growing numbers of "believers" like little children, to fear the "wrath of Allah" and with promises of Disneyland-like paradise, or perhaps an X-rated version of the same, who all look forward to at least once in their lives travelling to Mecca to mindlessly walk in circles like lemmings around a chunk of black stone that pagans used to worship before Islam even existed, and the people willingly believe this nonsense, then you can get them to do any freaking thing.

Just look. If things were so great back where your family is from, then why didn't they stay there? If they are truly good Muslims, shouldn't they be trying to improve conditions for their brothers back home, bringing peace, democracy and prosperity to their lands, instead of running away and thriving and profiting from the decadence and temptations of infidel Western countries?

So according to you "...there are 1.3 billion muslim in this world. I mean the radicals are about .000001 as a percent." This means there are only 1,300 Muslims causing all the problems. Really? So why don't the pacifist Muslims who vastly outnumber these 1,300 neutralize them? Just arrest them or round them up and bury them up to their heads in sand and have a good old fashioned Sharia stoning of them in the name of Allah.

It's not remotely nearly so simple or minor an issue as you pretend. And your sophomoric dismissal of it is not only naive, it is insidious, vile, reprehensible and truly evil. For this sick attitude is what is softening public opinion in Western society (the "pacifist" Muslims love to take advantage of weak-minded and self-proclaimed big-hearted liberals in Western society with these pseudo-humanist approaches), and it has allowed us to be increasingly infiltrated by demented radicals who control sheepish masses in mosques who believe these imams, ayatollahs, and muftis are divinely inspired and speak the truth. You and your type are opening the portals of hell and inviting all these demons to infect Western civilization. Well, here's a message: we won't go down without a fight, and as Muslims keep on bringing their god into the picture, watch out! Wait till the frothing fundamentals here start bringing their god and rallying the ever-growing, impatient masses. You want a crusade to justify your frozen in time 14th century ideology? You might just get what you've been praying for.
http://www.alternet.org/media/143779/focusing_on_ft._hood_killer's_beliefs_are_an_easy_out_to_avoid_the_deeper_reasons_for_the_massacre/?comments=view&cID=1362430&pID=1362050#c1362430

maude 4:13 PM  

thank you for posting.. i am an ex muslim living in Turkey, i see their hypocrisy obviously.. they are raping children while defending peaceful islam... are we stupid or blind?

Citizen Warrior 4:27 PM  

Some are stupid, some are blind, and some have just not yet been reached. That is who we must focus on: Those who don't yet know.

Catwoman 1:48 PM  

Am I missing the point, or stating the obvious?
If in the Qu'ran, one writing is replaced with another that contradicts it, then one of the writings must be in error.
If the second writing contradicts, and replaces the first writing, and the later one is deemed to be correct, then the earlier writing is in error.
As the Qu'ran is supposedly the inspired word of Allah, then Allah has corrected mistakes. Allah is capable of mistakes, and is therefore not perfect.
Are there no Moslems intelligent enough to see this?

Citizen Warrior 11:58 AM  

Catwoman,

The wording of the Qur'an is very clever. It doesn't say the earlier passages are wrong. It says the new passages are better. And Muslims have taken that to mean they are both correct, but when one conflicts with the other, the newer one trumps the older one.

This means that they CAN actually act peaceful toward non-Muslims when it is in Islam's best interest to do so. These contradictions have served the interests of Jihadis and these ostensibly contradictory passages are considered by Jihadis to be an example of Allah's cleverness.

Paul B 5:13 PM  

CW, I think you've missed the point, which is truth. If Islam is peace and love, if it is true, then let it prosper and let its advocates advocate. But if the peaceful Muslims are wrong, then that is the reason - the only reason - why they should desist.

Peaceful Muslims need to be encouraged not to keep quiet, but to do their own homework concerning the true nature of Islam. That's an entirely different direction.

Ed 7:34 PM  

Citizen Warrior,
You seem like a professional writer and educator, in the best sense. Something very unique about your work and perspective. Remarkable how you manage to take the positions you do, without animus or a dark quality. Instead, you maintain a breezy, educational, almost light tone throughout. The writing seems designed to be so useful to readers, as if you were writing how-to articles for some popular major national magazine. Your style is very convincing, and the lightness of tone conveys an atmosphere of sanity. It's also probably the best tone to take when trying to educate novices and the uncommitted and the non-ideological, who often shy away from intensity as being out-of-tune with themselves or a sign of something wrong. Yours is a great model to follow. Maybe there's hope for the resistance after all...Thank you, and I hope you'll be able to keep going with this.

Citizen Warrior 10:24 PM  

Thanks, Ed. I appreciate that.

Citizen Warrior 10:47 PM  

In an interview entitled, Growth of Muslim population in non-Muslim countries is serious threat, Robert Spencer was asked, "How many Muslims in the world, do you think, are 'moderate Muslims?'"

Spencer replied: "It depends on how one defines 'moderate.' If by it you mean those who are not engaged in violent jihad, then the number is huge. If you mean those who actively disapprove of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism in general, and are working against the jihad imperative, the number is minuscule."

Anonymous 1:55 PM  

Can anyone please make me understand the following:

The Koran (Qu'aran)is supposedly the word of Allah (God)as transmitted through Mohammed via Gabriel.

History shows that Mohammed married a 6 year old girl and had sex with her when she was 9 (pre-puberty). This goes against nature itself - no matter what era your living in. Mohammed had 22 wives. Mohammed slaughtered hundreds of Jews (beheading them). Mohammed changes the laws (rules) to suit him whenever he choose. Basically Mohammed behaved as a warlord once he had the power to do so.

So why would anyone want to follow this as an ideal example?? I am totally mystified why anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together can't see this for what it is??

Citizen Warrior 12:11 AM  

That is an excellent question. Why would anyone follow Mohammad?

The answers are many. First of all, the laws strongly support staying Muslim. The penalty for apostasy in a Muslim country is death. That is Sharia law.

Within a Muslim community anywhere in the world, even in free countries, it is still considered a horrible sin to leave Islam.

So as people have children, they pass on their identity as a Muslim, even if they do not follow the teachings whatsoever. These children, thinking of themselves as Muslims, are of course good candidates for recruitment by orthodox Muslims who tell the teenagers, "Do you know what's in the Quran? You call yourself a Muslim, but do you practice your faith? Your parents are hypocrites! Read the Quran and do your duty as a believing Muslim."

To discover all the reasons Islam has become so successful, read The Terrifying Brilliance of Islam.

Citizen Warrior 12:14 AM  

Also, it says in the Quran over seventy times that a Muslim must follow the example of Mohammad. The penalty for not following Mohammad's example is eternal torment in hell.

Also, it is actually forbidden for a Muslim to THINK anything critical of Mohammad or Islam.

Anonymous 1:13 AM  

Moderation is the enemy of any extremist. They thrive in a black-and-white world. This post agrees with the vision of extremistic Muslims: either you're a Muslim or you're a non-Muslim. This post states that a good Muslim is not relevant, because it does not fit in this black-and-white world.

Not a good muslim, but Citizen Warrior is helping the extremistic Islam to grow.

Saying that not the extremists but the Islam itself is the problem, you are creating a western version of the Jihad. "So you Muslims want Jihad? Fine, we can do that as well! I will declare myself a warrior."

Good luck with it.

Mike

Citizen Warrior 1:34 AM  

Mike,

To think that what a non-Muslim says about Islam will change a believing Muslim's world view is absurd.

In other words, imagine Amhed, a peaceloving "Muslim in name only" (MINO) who thinks Islam means peace. He's a nice guy. He's never read the Quran, but his parents were Muslims, so he considers himself a Muslim.

And then he reads some non-Muslim blogger saying the "true" Muslims are those who are intolerant toward non-Muslims. Will Ahmed become intolerant toward non-Muslims now?

Don't hold your breath. I know enough MINOs to know they are not influenced by anything I say. They think I just don't understand.

If you are a Christian, would you be influenced by a Muslim telling you what Christians believe? Or telling you what it says in the Bible?

Mike, what your criticism says is that what I write will influence Muslims who are against violence to BECOME violent.

Not only do I have almost no impact on Muslim beliefs because I am a non-Muslim, but my AUDIENCE is almost entirely non-Muslims. My job here is to alert the millions of non-Muslims living in free countries to the basic and often surprising teachings of mainstream Islam. These are teachings which are being actively hidden by Muslims who have actually read the Quran because they reveal a political plan that works best when the non-Muslims don't have a clue.

So what you're asking me to do is to be silent on the slim chance that something I say will influence a Muslim to become intolerant, while at the same time leaving all the non-Muslims I might have reached in the dark.

Hmmm. Let me see...

Nah. I don't think so.

I Slam Islam 3:51 AM  

Hi Citizen Warrior,

Thank You for answering my query. I appreciate your ability to articulate a position in this most important subject. I am in full agreement that the main reason that Islam continues to flourish is because of the fear of retribution if you don't follow the party line. The only way to defeat Islam will be through education and resistance. Unfortunately, the West is still tripping over itself trying not to "offend" anyone in the cause of Political Correctness".

I'm not the brighest light in the chandelier but it is glaringly obvious to me that Islam is not going away and will ruin/take over our Countries (USA/Canada)if our leaders don't grow a backbone and say enough is enough.

If it were up to me I would not allow Islam into our countries - period. I would close immigration to only those with Christian - Judeo backgrounds. If that makes me a racist/bigot then that's what I am.

I don't want to see a birka or hijab when I walk down the street. I don't want a woman fully clothed swimming in a public pool. I don't want a womans nose and ears cut off because she ran away when she couldn't stand being molested by men any longer.

I don't care if you are black/white or sky blue pink. People are entitled to their freedom and equality. It is an individuals choice to give those up. It shouldn't be stolen from you via brainwashing from day one. As a parent you should educate your child to all the possibilities in life and then as they get older and learn they can choose for themselves. This will never happen in Islam.

Sorry for ranting and diverging here and there. But I am so tired of people being taken advantage of by those who are "educated" enough to exploit them. This worls needs a real God and not the make believe one of Islam.

Anonymous 7:40 AM  

So what you are telling a moderate muslim, which makes up the mass-majority of all muslims, is this:

-Eventually we won't bother with niceties and just kill all muslims.
-What you believe is not islam, and we will refuse to believe you.
-either stop being a muslim, or die

this isn't that different from what the most extremist of the jihadi muslims do is it?

Citizen Warrior 12:00 PM  

You've made an awefully big leap there.

No, what I'm saying to peace-loving Muslims is, "Please stop interfering with my attempt to educate my fellow non-Muslims about the teachings of orthodox Islam that politically active and dangerous Muslims are following."

Anonymous 7:04 AM  

"But as you are fully aware, the Koran is one book, written by one man in his own lifetime." your point here is wrong CW. The Quran is not written by "one man" or any other men. The Quran is sent by God to the prophet.

Anonymous 11:35 AM  

As always rite on the mark." you can lead a horse to water ".........

Citizen Warrior 5:00 PM  

Someone emailed this:

It occurred to me that we might use the following thought with our "moderate" Muslim friends and neighbors who've moved to the USA for money, jobs, education, peace, opportunity, freedom, etc.

If they still believe Islam is truly peaceful and the radicals are just a small percentage of the total Muslim population, they should use their newfound freedom to help us push back the tide of radical aggression. If they don't, and we are unable to STOP the radicals, we will ALL be living in the environment they thought they'd left behind: one of fear, ignorance, poverty, government control, violence, injustice, torture, hardships, hopelessness...

tonydavis1945 10:59 AM  

This is another classic of yours!!!

Priyank Mehta 12:11 AM  

Great article, mate. I'm going to show this to all my friends and hope they help me in the war against all religions - not just Islam. I've never really forgiven religion after the Godra incident in Gujarat, India, or the Black Friday bombings in Mumbai.

dcat 8:32 PM  

I can't trust them so don't you dare ask me to! I read it and I don't like it just like I don't like any cult!

Denis MacEoin 6:33 AM  

The article is largely correct, but I'm surprised that the author doesn't seem to have heard of the most relevant Islamic doctrine: nasikh wa mansukh. There are two types of verses in the Qur'an. Broadly speaking, these are Meccan verses (dictated bwtween 610 and 622) and Medinan verses (622-632). You'll see this at the head of every chapter in an Arabic Qur'an. More precisely, there are verses (mainly Meccan) which have been abrogated (mansukh) and others (mostly Medinan) which abrogate (nasikh). Thus, peaceful verses from the early period, when Muhammad was trying to reconcile his various opponents were later abrogated when he moved (in Medina) to fight them. The jihad verses effectively cancel out early ones that speak of love. Not entirely, of course, since there must be love between Muslims. But there must be no love for non-Muslims. So, when Muslims say radicals should read the Qur'an, they forget that it is the violent verses that take priority.

Anonymous 7:22 AM  

Most people are simply unaware that Islam is NOT just another religion but a totalitarian political cult-like ideology, which compels its followers into blind obedience, teaches intolerance, brutality and locks all Muslims and non-Muslims in a struggle deriving directly from the 7th century nomadic, predatory, Bedouin culture.Islam means “submission” to the will of Allah and the teachings as depicted in the Qur’an which include jihad – the genocidal slaughter of infidels by the sword, killing by beheading, intolerance of other religions, as well as forcing submission to Islam. The ultimate goal of jihad is the domination of Islam over the entire world.Look at the photos, watch the videos, most of which come right out of the Muslim world, a world that glorifies death and destruction of all that is not Islamic.

Islam-is-seditious 8:42 PM  

To the writer who said Muslims live with Christians in peace lime the Copts in Egypt. You are obviously not aware that Egypt was a Christian country until the Muslims conquered them and cut out the tongues of the Copts! Yes a small percentage of Egypt is Christian and they live in constant fear, religious bigotry and have been told to leave by Morsi. I don't know of anywhere in the world where Muslims have ever lived at peace with anyone else if they reach 8-10% of the population because it is a Supremacist ideology that believes all nonMuslims are worthless and should be killed or converted. Muslims believe they are superior to everyone else and they hold us in distain.

A 3:43 AM  

I am a believer of the old, unmodified, one and only true version of Islam. I am informed on the doctrines of my faith. I want to convince non-Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace. By telling non-Muslims that message, that Islam is a religion of peace; I am fulfilling one of my obligations as a Muslim. As mentioned many times here on this site before, Muslims are mandated to follow all mandates. One of those mandates or obligations is as follows:
"Invite to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom and fair preaching, and argue with them in a way that is better. Truly, your Lord knows best who has gone astray from His Path, and He is the Best Aware of those who are guided." Quran (16:25)
From the above verse, we can derive that all Muslims are given the obligation to “Invite to the Way of your Lord,” in other words: “…explaining the philosophy and wisdom of Islam to the educated and intelligent classes, debating with the stubborn and the rigid; testifying to the truthfulness of the message with our behavior and conduct, our character and morals.” (not a quote from the Quran in case that wasn’t clear) So what am I, or other Muslims, accomplishing by posting things that may hinder the effectiveness of articles on this site and that may hinder people’s resolve in general? We are fulfilling one of many mandates we are obligated to follow. I indeed do understand the effect of my defense of my religion. Here’s where we disagree with each other however:
You state that, “You've replaced clarity with confusion. You've replaced resolve with hesitation.” I assume here you are saying that we defending our religion confuse people because they, taking our defense in consideration, are now confused and would not want to act badly against something that doesn’t deserve to be wronged, so they take no action at all. In other words think that if people think Islam is bad, people will act against acts of terror committed in the name of Islam, and if people think Islam is good, people will not act against acts of terror, or do so hesitantly, committed in the name of Islam. I can definitely see how could reach such a conclusion, but if you really think about this, you’ll see the mistake in that kind of thinking. If people think Islam is good, how does that affect their view on acts of terror made in the name of Islam wrongly? (They would understand why the terrorist acts made in the name of Islam are wrong once it is explained to them, how and why it is wrong according to Islam) The answer is: their views wouldn’t change, or at least shouldn’t logically. So really I’ll I’m hindering is widespread poorly based hate.
If all non-Muslims believed us and we successfully convinced everyone that Islam is really a religion of peace, I will be looked at normally. There won’t be a cloud of stereotypes on top of my head in everyone’s eyes. Maybe not a big plus for you, but it is for me, and all Muslims. But if I were in your shoes, I wouldn’t accept what I just said as great, and as you claim, it doesn’t stop jihadists, but here’s another way of looking at it:

A 3:51 AM  

Part II (continued from previous statement)

If all non-Muslims believed you, and you successfully convinced everyone that Islam is bad, and a religion of evil, what would happen? Firstly, you would have the potential to; convince political leaders to stop Islamic immigration, to boycott against any company selling halal food, or pretty much do anything that doesn’t violate the United States constitution, or your own country’s constitution, which leaves you all with truly endless possibilities. But, what do those things do that help stop Jihadists, nothing! They only make Muslims’ live miserable, because they would now be openly hated. All they do is stop, strip the rights of Muslims already here, and in turn, makes you bad-at least definitely not good. I mean think about it, do you think our governments are not already doing their best to fight jihadists? Maybe you could vote for a politician who plans to invest a lot in homeland security, but as for spreading bad things about Islam? It doesn’t really solve the problem; it only attacks the branches of a plant much bigger than we think. In fact, you are putting pesticide on a whole other plant.
It is most definitely our fault that so many are jihadists. We should seriously educate our ummah, putting an effort to show not just to non-Muslims, but to our own selves why terrorism is wrong, and explain how Islam is strongly against it. If Muslims generally start to understand that, then they’ll be less susceptible to people who do try to convince others to be terrorists.
All of that being said, defending our religion doesn’t replace “clarity with confusion,” it replaces clarity with something that has finer details and color. To someone living in a black and white world, where something bad can’t be associated with something good, I understand I’ve diminished their resolve, but to the majority of people, all we are doing is opening you to the facts, giving you finer details. All you have to do is take them in, with an open mind.
As for the issue of someone trying to convince Islam is a religion of peace and they are a terrorist deep down inside, look at first, is their argument logical? Can they be disproven? More likely than not however, you won’t ever engage a conversation, whether online or off, with a terrorist.
Now, I don’t want to make another insanely long statement-guess I already have (sorry)-but I don’t want people to say that I’m ignoring half the article, or I’m missing some points. So from now, claim away-or ask-about Islam and with God’s help, I will help you understand what Islam is really about. I mean really, how could you fool yourself that 1.6 billion+ people follow a religion of evil. If you are open minded you’ll see you are being lied to-not pointing fingers at who started the lies.
So any objections to this statement that prove me wrong logically?
Sorry for any offence in this comment, or my last, I didn’t mean to hurt anyone’s feelings, also sorry for any errors grammatically or any spelling errors.
Regardless, peace be upon you all! Have a great day!

Citizen Warrior 11:49 AM  

I'd say you had a point, A Said, except for the fact that violent jihadis are not our only problem.

Here's a useful distinction between hot-headed and long-range jihadis:

http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/10/long-range-jihadists.html

What we're trying to do here is educate non-Muslims about something very simple: The doctrines in Islamic texts are dangerous to non-Muslims. That's it.

What Muslims actually do with those doctrines is another matter. Some follow them, some do not. But it is a cold, hard fact that those commands are in the texts and they cannot be wished away, explained away, or reinterpreted. "Slay them wherever you find them" doesn't easily get reinterpreted to "Live and let live."

What will happen when enough non-Muslims understand this basic fact about Islam? They will be less willing to concede to Islamic pressure. If you don't know what kind of concessions I'm talking about, look here:

http://concess.blogspot.com/

Because of what is written in Islamic texts, there will be a constant and unrelenting pressure for non-Muslims to yield to Islamic norms forever. The only solution is the education of non-Muslims so they can resist the pressure. The other alternative is that the world will slowly become more Islamic until the only ideology left, the only way of life left, is Islam, which is Islam's prime directive:

http://www.inquiryintoislam.com/2010/08/islams-prime-directive.html

A 9:46 PM  

Yes, I see your point. However, you refuse to acknowledge mine. What Muslims do with their doctrines is the same matter. What Muslims are doing with their doctrines is misinterpreting God’s commands and words in the Quran. They are the jihadists you are fighting against. I agree completely with you that, as a Muslim, nothing said in the Quran can be wished away, explained away, or reinterpreted. But that is exactly what you are doing. “Slay them wherever you find them,” should not and logically cannot be reinterpreted into, “Live and let Live.” But neither can it mean, kill non-Muslims at first sight regardless of where you are. I suppose I really can’t say it too many times. This is out of context.
IN CONTEXT:
Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. ((2:190))
{And slay them wherever ye find them}, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. ((2:191))
But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. ((2:192))
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers. ((2:193))
It says in the verse right before it (2:190) that God (Allah is just the Arabic term) does not want Muslims to start fights, but fight against those who fight against us. Then comes the part, “slay them wherever you find them,” but then followed by two more verses which are relevant, in which they continue to say, “But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful,” further backed up by, “But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.” So once again, in really no way can you say it means “Live and let live,” or “slay them wherever you find them.”
(I’m splitting my reply into parts due to their length)

A 9:51 PM  

In the next part of your comment, I don’t like how you paint me as a person with their head in the clouds, but the link was certainly interesting, so thanks for supplying that, although, I fail to see the significance in small concessions. In theory, I can see where you are going with it, but other than the concessions already successfully made, how much further can “long-range jihadists” go? Another thing, which apparently, sorry if I assume wrong, you aren’t aware of the fact that Islamic sharia law is never to be applied to a non-Muslim. I mean, I can’t deny, just like that website (http://www.inquiryintoislam.com/2010/08/islams-prime-directive.html) said that one of Islam’s motives would be to convert everyone, which technically by default that is every religion’s goal, because why would you believe in something if you don’t think, or wouldn’t recommend, anyone else in believing in it? But to get the whole world under Islamic sharia law? Where in the Quran, Sunnah, or Hadith does it say that? In fact, under Islamic sharia law, dhimmis, what you refer to as “second class citizens,” live under the following conditions:
1. They live with the same cultural and political rights as Muslims
2. They will have autonomy and freedom of religion
3. Non-Muslims are required to take arms against an enemy of the Islamic state, thus sharing the cost of war
4. Non-Muslims however, aren’t obligated to participate in religious wars of the Muslims
5. (thought this was obvious, but just in case) Non-Muslims must pay jizya tax
6. Limits on freedom of speech

Really, the only thing non-Muslims would have to worry about in an Islamic state is the jizya tax and the limits on freedom of speech. The limits of speech pertaining to saying things against Islam in a public area where religious groups (including Muslims) mix. You would also not be able to have church bells or sound any horns. Somewhere on this site, it also incorrectly states that non-Muslims under Islamic rule aren’t allowed to repair/upgrade their religious buildings/sites, but this is not true. They are allowed to repair/upgrade religious building/site but only with consent of the government (which is what you already have to do here in the US). If you are a dhimmis, Muslims are forbidden to harm you or treat you in a way that would cause harm:
A hadith by Muhammad, "Whoever killed a Mu'ahid (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise though its fragrance can be smelt at a distance of forty years (of traveling)"
Majid Khadduri cites a similar hadith in regard to the status of the dhimmis: "Whoever wrongs one with whom a compact (treaty) has been made [i.e., a dhimmi] and lays on him a burden beyond his strength, I will be his accuser."
I also argue that jizya tax is kind of like social security taxes we already pay, because social security offers you just that, while jizya tax does the same. Also, under Islamic sharia, Muslims will be paying zakat tax that you will not pay, and historically, the two taxes have been roughly equal-except in one situation-in which Islamic leaders want to put pressure to convert non-Muslims, but the amount of pressure they are allowed to put Islamically is limited, due to the above provided hadith. Many of you probably don’t know but jizya tax is only taken from adult males. My proof of that: (but this only applies to non-Muslims who are Christians or Jews)
"The Sunnah is that there is no jizya due from women or children of people of the Book, and that jizya is only taken from men who have reached puberty. The people of dhimma ... do not have to pay any zakat ... This is because zakat is imposed on the Muslims to purify them and to be given back to their poor, whereas jizya is imposed on the people of the Book to humble them." (Al-Muwatta)
(I’m splitting my reply into parts due to their length)

A 9:52 PM  

Having said all that, the only “norms” that would be forced upon non-Muslims is the jizya tax and the limited public freedom of speech in the presence of Muslims. Otherwise, nothing else really affects you.
Another point I think I should clarify just in case, for anyone reading this, when I said, “Islamic sharia law is never to be applied to a non-Muslim,” what I mean exactly is that a non-Muslim, in an Islamic state, would never have their hands cut of, or being stoned to death for stealing or adultery because the punishments of Sharia don’t apply to you. Non-Muslims are allowed to have their own system of laws and self-govern themselves. Which means, if a non-Muslim male is somehow discovered to have sex outside of marriage, the Islamic punishment is not relevant, it is the inner society’s laws that he is in that decides his punishment, unless of course, his action would have been done publically, which is a disgrace in all modern countries today anyway.
My main point is, I think you guys have all the rights of the world to resist pressure of Muslims, but you aren’t educating non-Muslims about Islam, you are just following in perfect sync with the media, not forming views that have foundations on truths that you logically and open-mindedly form. You yourself don’t know much about Islam, because you insist on gathering resources about Islam from non-Muslim sources, which in turn get their info from non-Muslim resources. Somewhere down the line someone started the fabrications, but that is beside the point. I suppose you’ve never had a Muslim try to prove you wrong so rigorously, but that is what I’m here to do. Name anything that you believe proves that orthodox or unmodified Islam is just an evil cult and not a religion of peace, and I will do my best to contradict you.
Sorry if anything here struck anyone as offensive, that is not my goal. Sorry if anything was hard to understand, just post so and I’ll do my best to clarify. Excuse me please from any mechanics and usage errors or spelling errors, or any writing errors in general.
Peace Be Upon you all.

chris heath 7:47 AM  

CW - great work. Your approach and methods, I believe are the best ways to tackle spreading Islamization. And your analysis of the Koranic texts (should I say Mohammedan texts) is spot on. A Said. You would do better to employ your organs of sight, rather than attempt to prove the unprovable. CW has said it is of very little use to show that Islam is a religion of peace. The fact is WE DON'T BELIEVE it. Sorry for shouting. Almost anyone in the world can see what's going on in Muslim dominated countries. Of course, we also know, that political Islam is quite prepared to kill in the name of peace.
A quick look at religion - in most religions, Hindu, Christian, Buddhist,etc., people are willing to die for their god. In Islam, they are willing to kill for theirs.

staten 1:09 PM  

Dear A Said,

Your response is construed in a such way as if only you ( Muslims) can read , interpret and educate us non-Muslims on the verses of the Koran correctly but we, kufars, are just ignorant , gullible simpletons fooled by our media who are unable to see truths and that's why need your Muslim guidance. This is the key point of your message. It smells of arrogance and It is sooo Muslim. I am surprised you didn't include an argument ‘You have to read the Koran in the original Arabic to understand it fully’ (Muslim's favored game when they are cornered by facts they cannot refute).

You took the phrase “Slay them wherever you find them,” and wrapped it around with the Koranic earlier verses 2:190-2:193 saying that " Allah does not want Muslims to start fights, but fight against those who fight against us" . But you are not honest here interpreting it to us this way.
You want us completely to ignore the 2:193 stating "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah". What does it mean "and religion is for Allah"? This means that Muslims must fight and kill unbelievers " until “religion is Allah’s,” or Islamic law rules all societies . This idea is very clearly stated in later verses. They (Muslims) must fight unbelievers “until there is no fitnah and until the religion, all of it, is for Allah” (8:39). Muslims are to fight unbelievers and “prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know but whom Allah knows” (8:60).

(continued in partII)

staten 1:18 PM  

to A (partII)

In 2:216 the Koran states “Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not”
Here we see for the first time that war was not only permissible but "is prescribed for you" even if you abhor it .

The same command as in 2:191 "kill them wherever you find them" the Koran orders Muslims in Sura 9.5:
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular Prayers and practise regular Charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful”

As we see clearly in this verse there is only one way out for or infidels to be spared from being slain. They should repent, establish regular prayers, and practice regular charity. In other words to become 100% Muslims. Or in the same sura 9: 29, which tells us the way out of being killed “until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”

Koran 58:5
"Those who resist Allah and His Messenger will be crumbled
to dust, as were those before them: for we have already
sent down Clear Signs and the Unbelievers will have a
humiliating Penalty"

Those who resist Allah and His Messenger" obviously
refers to anyone who is not a Muslim. Therefore every
Non-Muslim must be crushed to death by the holy edict of
Allah.


In summary. There is no "peace "in the entire holy Muslim book for infidels (non-Muslims) and Islam is not a "religion of peace" , as you trying to paint it. The Koranic texts are in the stark contrast with your picture of peaceful Islam . Any deluded Non-Muslim who like you thinks that Islam is "the religion of peace" and that it is only misguided Muslims who commit terrorism and atrocities because they "distort Islamic teachings", just pick up an English translation of the Koran from any bookstore and refer to these verses (Surahs).

We don't need your Muslim guidance. We don't need your mullahs, sheiks or imams to interpret what we read. We don't need your Muslim sources and we don't need you to help us to understand the key point of the Koran. Just as CW rightly says - pick up the book and read it yourself in the chronological order. If you are in your right mind you cannot miss the main message of the Koran - Even a mass murderer will eventually attain Pardise if he is Muslim,
wheras any Non-Muslim, even if he happens to be a Saint, is eternally damned to Hellfire by Allah's decree. Any self-respecting human being who reads the Koran will be revolted at the violence and sadism espoused in it towards non-Muslims just because they are not Muslims.

Your only defense for the Qur’an’s violent verses, and the ongoing actions of Islamic barbarians we see on the news, is to tell us that we’re ignorant of Islam and that we take the verses in the Qur’an “out of context.” That's exactly what you and our liberal media are doing today trying to prove that White is Black, Black is White but Night is Day.



I salute CW and his brilliant analysis on Islam helping us to find a right path to the truth through the jungles of lies , desinformation and obfuscation craftily created by Muslims, by our media and by our for-sale politicians duping our misguided by multiculturalism and political correctness society in order to advance their own agenda . But if we will have more CWs openly fighting Islam in our schools , universities , in media , Islamic deadly grip on the neck of our society will loosen and Islam will collapse like a house of cards , because Islam hates truth.

Anonymous 3:28 AM  

wow this is somehting all moderate muslims have to read
i hve so many muslim friends trng to convert me to islam coz they say a war is comeing and ill regret it when i go to hell
wht do i say back?

Citizen Warrior 11:49 AM  

Don't say anything back. Just stop being friends to orthodox Muslims.

Anonymous 7:21 PM  

I thought it was to long, drawn out and repetitive, sorry. good points, just re said
too many times.

Anonymous 2:39 AM  

the solution is simple. if you want to maintain your culture, breed like hell. we only have our selves to blame. 2 couples have 1 child, those 2 offspring also have have 1 child together. their is no increase in population. Muslims are having 4 to 14 children. it is inevitable. SO I SAY HAVE MORE CHILDREN.

A 7:44 PM  

staten:
I am very sorry that my comments seemed arrogant and I did not mean to convey that anyone was a simpleton. But I have no idea how I wrote in a way that seemed arrogant. I apologize and would like to know what about my writing style conveyed such a message? (other than what is already mentioned as I will argue those points below)

{{You took the phrase “Slay them wherever you find them,” and wrapped it around with the Koranic earlier verses 2:190-2:193 saying that " Allah does not want Muslims to start fights, but fight against those who fight against us" . But you are not honest here interpreting it to us this way.
You want us completely to ignore the 2:193 stating "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah". What does it mean "and religion is for Allah"? This means that Muslims must fight and kill unbelievers " until “religion is Allah’s,” or Islamic law rules all societies . This idea is very clearly stated in later verses. They (Muslims) must fight unbelievers “until there is no fitnah and until the religion, all of it, is for Allah” (8:39). Muslims are to fight unbelievers and “prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know but whom Allah knows” (8:60).}}

Firsty, I don’t like how you use the verb wrapped around as if this is somehow sneaky. Anything ever said by anyone or any text should always have its context with it. To take it out (of its context) is unfair, surely we can come to an agreement to that, yes?

When you read the Koran, or when anyone reads the Koran, I don’t want you to ever ignore a single word. I believe every single one is important otherwise Allah/God (I’ll use Allah from now on) wouldn’t have included them there. So, bottom line, as I believe I know myself better than you do, I don’t want you to ignore the part of (2:193) that has been translated in English to mean “and religion is for Allah”. I have looked around at different translations and that particular part of that verse is translated differently in various places. The word in the verse that seems to be causing the most variation is din, which indeed is usually taken to mean religion. So I’ll leave the word din as religion in this instance. (not sure why justice or faith was included in other translations, but I’m sure they had their reasons)

Keeping that in mind (that I don’t want you to ignore a single word of the Koran when trying to determine its meaning or otherwise) I believe you need to continue to look at the verse when it says: “But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.” ((2:193)) This part directly after the “and religion is for Allah”. You completely ignored that part.

To summarize, verses (2:190) to (2:193) tell Muslims that they aren’t allowed to start fights, but that they must fight against those who decide to fight them and that they should do so for Allah. (gathered from 2:190) If a Muslim finds someone who does engage in fighting with them they are to slay them. (gathered from 2:191) But if the Muslims’ enemy stops trying to kill Muslims they are forgiven by Allah. (gathered from 2:192) The last verse in this set of verses tell Muslims that they must continue to fight their enemy until persecution is no more and all of the enemy are either converted or killed unless the enemy stop attacking in which case Muslims are obligated to treat them pretty much as if nothing happened as Allah has forgiven them because they stopped. (gathered from 2:193) Not a single word is there that I have neglected.

If you think about 2:190 to 2:193 it is really just common logic with some restraints on the side. Someone fights you, fight back until they stop fighting you. That’s pretty much it.

I shall continue to rebut your comments in later statements, Insha Allah. May peace be upon you! Enjoy the remainder of your day to the fullest! :)

Anonymous 5:36 PM  


Dear A said ,

I personally have nothing against you . I just disagree with your message where you demonstrate in bold that only you, Muslims, may be the highest , unquestionable authorities when it boils down to interpreting the Koranic texts.

Next. You said I took the verse 2:193 out of context and you later summarized “ If you think about 2:190 to 2:193 it is really just common logic with some restraints on the side. Someone fights you, fight back until they stop fighting you. That’s pretty much it.”

I don't buy it. First of all, your explanation does not sound either convincing or persuading. Muslims love to chastise the infidels for quotes from the Koran that are always taken out of context. So, if we take the verse 9:5 'Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them' , we shouldn't believe to our own eyes, according to Muslims. It's “taken out of context” , Muslims say. It really means 'Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them setting fire to your house' . Something similar we can find in your explanation. However, 2:193 is not a result of someone's aggression against Islam and the following fight against aggressors but exactly the opposite because running away from Mecca Mohammad received a “revelation” in which Allah told him to make war upon all -non Muslims.

Another thing. If you Muslims say that we kafirs always take the Koranic texts out of context or interpreting them wrongly , we always can back up our claims by getting much of the known contexts of Quranic verses in the Tafsirs, hadiths , Muhammad's Sira or Muslim sources.

Let’s take a deeper look into the Quran.
2:193. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.) The Noble Quran [6].

The context and background of the above passages can be found in Ibn Ishaq's and Tabari's work or from the biographical work of Ibn Ishaq's "Sirat Rasulallah", where two passages from the Koran are referenced, Sura 22:39-41(“peaceful” Meccan) and 2:193.

“When they (the Muslims) are in the ascendant they will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity, i.e., the prophet and his companions all of them." Then God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction," [b] i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's," i.e. until God alone is worshipped."
So, Muhammad received from Allah the command to fight non-Muslims, until "God alone is worshiped" , meaning Islam is the only religion for all humankind. These Quranic verses were not only for self defense, they also allowed aggressive violence, even terrorism, against non-Muslims what exactly continuing non-stop since Islam's inception in 6th century.

Anonymous 5:41 PM  

Part II

An another hadith just confirms one more time the sated above:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshiped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24)

From this one we clearly see that Mohammad was ordered to fight not just the Meccans but all people until they become Muslims.

And this is just one verse 2:193 . You said nothing about 8:39, 8:60, 9:5, 9: 29, 58:5 and many other verses of violence against non-Muslims clearly indicating that “peacful” Islam is impossible. “Peaceful” Islam is anti-Islam. The Koranic texts , Haddiths, Tafsir and historical Muslim sources give us abundant proofs. As I said earlier, we don't need your Muslim guidance to educate us, kafirs, about true meaning of Islam.

staten 2:10 PM  

More on your reasoning.

You said:

"When you read the Koran, or when anyone reads the Koran, I don’t want you to ever ignore a single word. I believe every single one is important otherwise Allah/God (I’ll use Allah from now on) wouldn’t have included them there."

It depends who is reading the Koran. When you, Muslims, reading it , you must believe an every single word written in it including commas, dots , colons , semicolons, question marks , dashes and exclamation marks. You MUST believe the Koran is written by Allah , a copy of the Quran has been preserved in heaven and for eternity . The book is perfectly preserved in the same way as it was revealed – without omissions, additions and alterations and every word in it therefore reflects undeniable truth that cannot be questioned. The punishment for questioning the Koran is death.

However , when we kafirs read the Koran , we are free of any obligations and therefore we can use our critical thoughts and skepticism.

The first thing comes to your mind , after reading the Koran, is how can a All Knowing, All Powerful, Omnipresent Supreme Being make hundreds and more of errors, mistakes, inconsistencies, contradictions and sheer laughable stuff , like sun setting in mud at night ? The one possible explanation is that the Koran has no divine origin whatsoever but was simply devised by Muhammad in the context of situations, aspirations and desires of Muhammad’s life. A life of a man with his lust for power, who was pretty amoral , was famous with his acceptance of lying (al-Taqiyya, Kitman and breaking of oaths), was involved in thieving, enslaving, womanizing/rape, murder and terrorism of non-Muslims that still continues today. Hardly a “holy” prophet .

If God picked such a “prophet” to represent him and gave divine sanction and upport/encouragement to His prophet’s criminal acts, then God would no longer be Moral Perfection and therefore no longer God but just an accomplice to his evil prophet. God cannot be a criminal. It's anti-god and Mohammad was a perfect creator of this anti-god spewing hatred and curses against non-Muslims from the pages of his unholy book – the Koran.

staten 2:43 PM  

One more short remark on “taking the Koranic verses out of context”

The Koran tells us in 85:21 & 15:9 that the book was written by Allah (probably before the creation of the Universe), and a copy of the Koran has been preserved in heaven. The Koranic verses are supposed to be the guide to life. If Quranic verses are just the contexts of each other, like you say, where do we find the guide to our life in the Quran? Allah didn’t write them relating to particular circumstances, experience or background, if it was written before the creation and preserved in heaven since. So, in ideal case the Koranic verses don't need to have any context whatsoever but many verses in the Koran indeed have context, because the author of the Koran is Mohammad. Mohammad created god (Allah) in his own image. Mohammad=Allah. Allah=Mohammad.

A 11:14 AM  

Peace be upon you, dear reader.

I reply to the following comment made by staten:

One more short remark on “taking the Koranic verses out of context”

The Koran tells us in 85:21 & 15:9 that the book was written by Allah (probably before the creation of the Universe), and a copy of the Koran has been preserved in heaven. The Koranic verses are supposed to be the guide to life. If Quranic verses are just the contexts of each other, like you say, where do we find the guide to our life in the Quran? Allah didn’t write them relating to particular circumstances, experience or background, if it was written before the creation and preserved in heaven since. So, in ideal case the Koranic verses don't need to have any context whatsoever but many verses in the Koran indeed have context, because the author of the Koran is Mohammad. Mohammad created god (Allah) in his own image. Mohammad=Allah. Allah=Mohammad.

End of Comment.

I was hoping the author could clarify what they mean by their question: “If Quranic verses are just the contexts of each other, like you say, where do we find the guide to our life in the Quran?” I honestly don’t understand it at all.

“Allah didn’t write them relating to particular circumstances, experience or background, if it was written before the creation and preserved in heaven since.” Muslims believe that Allah knows all things at all times. He already knew what was going to happen when he first created the universe, so I think it’s safe to say this argument and all the subsequent ones dependent it are invalid (in other words the rest of the comment).

However, I still feel like I am missing something. Does the author try to say each verse should be able to stand on its own and get a point across? If this is the case I think the author is being unreasonable for each and every verse was not revealed on its own. And surely verses weren’t organized into surahs for no reason.

Best regards,

A.

A 8:25 AM  

Peace be upon you, dear reader.

I respond to staten’s comment that begins like so:

“You said:

"When you read the Koran, or when anyone reads the Koran, I don’t want you to ever ignore a single word. I believe every single one is important otherwise Allah/God (I’ll use Allah from now on) wouldn’t have included them there."

It depends who is reading the Koran. When you, Muslims, reading it , you must believe an every single word written in it including commas, dots , colons , semicolons, question marks , dashes and exclamation marks.”

First I will being reminding the reader the Koran is written without commas, dots, colons, semicolons, question marks, dashes or exclamation marks excluding the dots found constituting letters. The only punctuation that can be found in the Koran denote recitation rules (ex. where you are allowed to stop to take a breath) and the end of verses.

Secondly, I do not ask for non-Muslims to believe in every single word of the Koran or any single one. I mean to say one MUST consider every single word found in the Koran when trying to determine what the Koran is trying to say. If you decide to exclude or ignore any word of it when creating a translation you have an inaccurate translation.

Imagine if I said in Arabic: He said you needed no milk. If one decided to ignore the word “no” in their translation of my sentence into English is the translation truly my word anymore or is it the translator’s? And in Arabic “he said” is just one word. If the translator decided to ignore “he said” and translated my sentence does the resulting English sentence convey what I wanted to convey? No, it doesn’t. What you have is the translator’s own version of my sentence.

I say it is the same with the Koran.

“However , when we kafirs read the Koran , we are free of any obligations and therefore we can use our critical thoughts and skepticism.”

Go ahead and use your critical thoughts, I don’t want you to abandon anything. It is just that you can’t edit a text to your liking and then look at the edited version to decided what the original version was trying to say. That is common logic and does not require one to believe in anything. I am sure on that we can find common ground.

Now as for these inconsistencies, as you seem to imply there are many, I am likely to not find all of them, so I ask you list and say directly where one can find the inconsistencies you speak of. Otherwise, your case is as strong as mine if I were to say there weren't any inconsistencies.

Best Regards,

A.

staten 11:33 AM  

Response to A:

“I was hoping the author could clarify what they mean by their question: “If Quranic verses are just the contexts of each other, like you say, where do we find the guide to our life in the Quran?” I honestly don’t understand it at all.”

OK. Let's try do it again applying a little bit of logic . When Muslims say “you have quoted out of context”, this could mean two things: 1. the historical context to which the various verses may refer to 2. The textual context, the actual place in a particular chapter that this or that verse is referred to or quoted from.

I f we take 1 , the historical context argument does not hold water here as the Koran is a book presumably made trillions years ago before any human history, is an exact copy of the Mother Book in the Heaven, and is the eternal word of God (Allah ) and is true and valid for all times, according to the Islamic claim.

In 2 when Muslims blame kafirs for quoting out of context , this argument could be turned against Muslims themselves. When you Muslims quoting verses preaching tolerance, you also quoting them out of context as all conciliatory Meccan verses have been cancelled by a more belligerent and intolerant ones like 9:5, according to the Koranic principles of abrogation.

The tolerant verses in the Koran are anomalous and have no meaning since Muslim theologians ignored them completely when developing Islamic Law. We also can refer to the subsequent historical records clearly demonstrating that Mohammad's followers were not motivated by the peaceful Meccan verses when they conquered a large portion of the world with the sword and fire from the Atlantic to China. It's still true today.


“Allah didn’t write them relating to particular circumstances, experience or background, if it was written before the creation and preserved in heaven since.” Muslims believe that Allah knows all things at all times. He already knew what was going to happen when he first created the universe, so I think it’s safe to say this argument and all the subsequent ones dependent it are invalid (in other words the rest of the comment)."

If Allah knows all things at all times and created a Mother Book in Heaven perhaps trillions years ago before the creation , that the Koran is a precise copy of the Mother Book and was designed as the only true guide for all humanity, how come that the guide for all humanity contains a verse 33:37 solving Muhammad's family affairs? Why humanity does need to know about Muhammad’s lust to his adopted son's wife? How did Muhammad's family problems end up in the "mother book" written may be trillions of years earlier? Why Allah revere texts like this? The answer is only one – it is Muhammad the man who is speaking. His Koran is reflection of his ego, his desires, his ambitions and his plans for enforcing Islam on all non-Muslims.

staten 11:38 AM  

A said:

“First I will being reminding the reader the Koran is written without commas, dots, colons, semicolons, question marks, dashes or exclamation marks excluding the dots found constituting letters. The only punctuation that can be found in the Koran denote recitation rules (ex. where you are allowed to stop to take a breath) and the end of verses.”

Well , what you saying may be true. I have no problems with this. But that are you Muslims who often claim something like this : "the Holy Quran remains the same from start to now. It has not changed one letter or one coma or one dot. That is Just miracle. “ https://www.facebook.com/invitationtotruth.co/posts/645740515492952.

Though this claim is false, but this was not my point. My point is that Muslims are not allowed to read their holy book with open mind using common sense or logic. They MUST accept everything as it is without any traces of doubts.

A:
"Secondly, I do not ask for non-Muslims to believe in every single word of the Koran or any single one. I mean to say one MUST consider every single word found in the Koran when trying to determine what the Koran is trying to say. If you decide to exclude or ignore any word of it when creating a translation you have an inaccurate translation.

Imagine if I said in Arabic: He said you needed no milk. If one decided to ignore the word “no” in their translation of my sentence into English is the translation truly my word anymore or is it the translator’s? And in Arabic “he said” is just one word. If the translator decided to ignore “he said” and translated my sentence does the resulting English sentence convey what I wanted to convey? No, it doesn’t. What you have is the translator’s own version of my sentence.

I say it is the same with the Koran."

Before going further, I 'd like to ask you a question , do you believe that the Koran can be translated to other languages without losing its original meaning?


A:
“Now as for these inconsistencies, as you seem to imply there are many, I am likely to not find all of them, so I ask you list and say directly where one can find the inconsistencies you speak of. Otherwise, your case is as strong as mine if I were to say there weren't any inconsistencies.”


Yes, the Koran has a lot of inconsistencies, invalid logic , contradictions , unclear language and  
lots of non-Arab words in spite of Muslim claims that it is written in “pure” Arabic.

Couple examples.
 In Surah 11:44 the Koran says that the Ark came to rest on top of mount Judi. The Bible says that it was Mount Ararat (Genesis 8:4).

The Quran says Abraham had two sons. The Bible says they were eight.

18:86 "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."                

A pure astronomical nonsense . The SUN is over ONE MILLION times bigger than the Earth .

  How could God , any god, ever deliver a book full of scientific nonsense, inconsistencies, wrong logic and historical errors ? Obviously it's not possible. The Koran is nothing else but the records of the of personal thoughts, needs, hope, fears, lusts, hatred, anger and personally intimate matters of Muhammad ONLY!

NoDhimmi 12:12 AM  

Muslims and denial---ABROGATION in the koran?
UNDENIABLY!
And the taqiyya merchant who said he could not find it in his koran did not look very hard. All it takes is Google...

Here are the actual Quranic verses that reference abrogation. All quotes are from Dawood's English Translation of the Quran.[7]

2:106: "If We abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or one similar...."

13:39: "God abrogates and confirms what He pleases. His is the Decree Eternal."

17:86: "If We pleased We could take away that which We have revealed to you:.."

16:101 "When We change one verse for another (God knows best what He reveals), they say: "You are an impostor...."

22:52: "Never have we sent a single prophet or apostle before you with whose wishes Satan did not tamper. But God abrogates the interjections of Satan and confirms His own revelations."

A 7:37 PM  

I write the following comment in response to the last comment made by “staten.” I will specifically address anything I think is controversial or incorrect though I shall not limit myself in that regard.
The first point of the post is Muslims must accept anything in the Koran without a trace of doubt. Why, of course, I say to this. It is the duty of a Muslim, before becoming of age, to become convinced of the religion to that degree. This was actually one of the reasons I started coming to sites/blogs like this one, to test my knowledge of my religion and to get rid of the doubts I had. A convert, likewise, should be sure to that degree.
Next, staten puts forth a question: “Before going further, I 'd like to ask you a question , do you believe that the Koran can be translated to other languages without losing its original meaning?”
I must say this is a very nice question. It made me think, very carefully. Arabs, I don’t think, have too much of an advantage over anyone in understanding the Koran if one has at disposal translations and context. The thing that translations can lose is connotation of Arabic words, even if they stay true to denotation, but it’s not like the Arabic of today has maintained the connotation of all of the words of the Koran in everyday speech or language. In this, we rely on Islamic Scholars. To answer directly: not quite, but anyone who challenges the veracity of a translation better come with an indisputable and understandable problem; otherwise, they are probably just out of good ideas. Think about it this way: If a translation conveyed the Koran perfectly, why would someone decide to translate the Koran even though translations already existed? After the first English translator, why was a second translation made by someone else?
In conclusion, to this question, I say you can achieve as much understanding of the Koran by the translations of it as obtained by those who never look at them, however the original text should still be looked at in order to achieve so. As in, realize that any translation is not the Koran, not the verbatim word of God.
(Note: I found the above answer very hard to convey. If there is something confusing please tell me so. May God forgive us all for any mistakes we make.)
Regarding the inconsistencies provided, the first two are contradictions, as said; however, they do not reflect incorrectness or inconsistencies within the Koran itself. They are things from another text, one that staten holds to be true, that do not reflect agreement or consistency with the Koran. To mention that the first two given examples are proof of incorrectness in the Koran is to cite that God does not exist as proof for the Koran’s incorrectness as both rely on previously held beliefs to be credible. This is not debatable, not something I can refute. One is always “right” on a contention that is based on previously held beliefs as the two given examples and my own are. I can say the Bible is wrong through the exact same reason. The last example of a contradiction, however, is different, it is plausible, in a sense the other two are not.
I will continue this in another post. May peace and blessings be upon you! I also apologize for the time delay.

A 3:18 PM  

May peace and blessings be upon you. The following post of mine deals with a specific part of a comment previously made. Namely:

18:86 "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."                

A pure astronomical nonsense . The SUN is over ONE MILLION times bigger than the Earth .

End quote.

This post, however, in part, is a continuation of my previous post. That aside, onward:
I think this the epitome of what I have already mentioned regarding translations. This is an example in which a translation fails to convey the connotation/usage of certain Arabic words. Before continuing, I will agree the Sun is larger than the Earth, by over a million times (in terms of how many Earths can fit in the Sun); I will not try to argue against the well-known fact.
The provided translation isn’t necessarily incorrect nor does it necessarily lose meaning, but one will soon see how meaning is altered, for the lack of a better word with me. The first problem arises from the word “reached,” or so I assume it can be interpreted as a problem, science wise, though perhaps not. As one cannot reach the setting of the sun. To one seeing this as a problem I would say the Arabic word being translated into “reached” is بلغ balagha, and that balagha is not describing the literal reaching of a certain place, but reaching of an unspecified one and/or one of time, as can been seen through context in the following verses (And I say and/or, based on context provided below, because children can reach puberty anytime, the time isn’t set or known exactly):
وَإِذَا بَلَغَ ٱلۡأَطۡفَـٰلُ مِنكُمُ ٱلۡحُلُمَ فَلۡيَسۡتَـٔۡذِنُواْ ڪَمَا ٱسۡتَـٔۡذَنَ ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبۡلِهِمۡ‌ۚ كَذَٲلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ ٱللَّهُ لَڪُمۡ ءَايَـٰتِهِۦ‌ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَڪِيمٌ۬ 
Sahih International: And when the children among you reach puberty, let them ask permission [at all times] as those before them have done. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise. (24:59)
وَلَمَّا بَلَغَ أَشُدَّهُ ۥ وَٱسۡتَوَىٰٓ ءَاتَيۡنَـٰهُ حُكۡمً۬ا وَعِلۡمً۬ا‌ۚ وَكَذَٲلِكَ نَجۡزِى ٱلۡمُحۡسِنِينَ
Sahih International: And when he attained his full strength and was [mentally] mature, We bestowed upon him judgement and knowledge. And thus do We reward the doers of good. (28:14)
In the specific verse provided by staten, balagha is determining or talking about time. It is saying once he reached sunset. This conclusion being reached, the next clause of the translation, “he found it set in a spring of murky water,” shall, God willing, be examined:

A 3:19 PM  

The “crazy” part of the verse is تغرب في عين, which is being translated as “it set in a spring of murky water.” “It” is referring to the sun, I think we can agree. In English, it might sound awkward but this says that “he” saw the sun set in/behind the aforementioned body of water. I don’t see how one could justify the literal inside of the body of water interpretation from the original Arabic wording. If you disagree, I would like to see a proper justification for that before coming to argue this point any further.
The “Near it” part, with the “it” in Arabic being feminine, can refer, grammatically, to either the sun or the water; however, in context, as “he” has already seen the sun set, which means the sun is no longer there, it makes more sense to understand the “it” to be the spring/water.
Still keeping in mind what I have already said of the provided translation, the following interpretation conveys the second to a more truer degree:
Arberry: until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and he found nearby a people. We said, 'O Dhool Karnain, either thou shalt chastise them, or thou shalt take towards them a way of kindness.' (18:86)
As a side note, the goal of the “translations” of the Koran isn’t to properly translate, as is the case normally with any text. In that, preserving the grammar structure is not as important as preserving the gist/message of the text because what readers of the “translations” want in the end, really, is the message. And I say this now because the last interpretation I provide, I notice, does not stay true to the grammar structure of the original Arabic words; however, I notice that other interpretations that do (stay true to the grammar) are not, in some regard, better at conveying the message/concepts of the verse.
Case in point, the provided verse is not saying the Sun was found/seen on Earth by the “he” of the verse, hence the claim that this verse proves the Koran incorrectness does not hold true, as can be seen.

Zackery Martel 12:23 AM  

Okay, now give us the "correct" translation of 9:5:

Slay the idolaters wherever you find them.

For you non-Muslims reading this, here is what it all means:

http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/09/qurans-last-word-on-non-muslims.html

A 12:59 PM  

May peace and blessings be upon you!
This comment is in response to the previous remark of Mr. Zackery Martel.
I am so elated that I received a comment in retaliation so quickly, this is the first time this has happened (that I’ve noticed), so very much thank you for your time.
Firstly, I’d like to point out that the entirety of verse 9:5 has not been provided so I will take it upon myself to provide it (I have chosen a translator who uses the words “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them” to translate what is a portion of that verse):
Shakir: So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
I would not say I object to the above translation, not in a way I can currently think of, anyway. That said, Mr. Martel has given the “correct,” as it is put, translation, or as I would prefer to say, interpretation.
What I do object to is the taking of the verse out of its context. Had this verse been its own book, its own chapter even, then sure, no need to consider the verses immediately before it or after it, none at all if they are in nonexistence; however, this is not the case with this verse. It is ALWAYS logical to look at any given text’s context, always. Looking at context to interpret what something means is a reading skill. There is a reason reading comprehension skills are so emphasized in current education systems and college entry exams.
This said, I refer all to the immediate verse after, (9:6) by the same exact translator:
Shakir: And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know.
God willing, this shall be continued...

A 1:00 PM  

It is very clear unless one of the “idolaters” of the above interpretation is not seeking protection that verse (9:6) applies to them. It is very clear if one of the idolaters seeks protection from Muslims that Muslims are responsible to make sure to protect them until they have heard the word of Allah and then it is still the responsibility of Muslims to direct one of the idolaters, who at which point have sought protection and have heard the word of Allah, to a place of safety. This verse guarantees non-combatants that they will be escorted out of war zones and will not be killed even if they have had no previous treaty with the Muslims.
Here is an exegesis of the same verses that may explain it better:
This verse was revealed towards the end of the revelation period and relates to a limited context. Hostilities were frozen for a three-month period during which the Arabs pledged not to wage war. Prophet Muhammad was inspired to use this period to encourage the combatants to join the Muslim ranks or, if they chose, to leave the area that was under Muslims rule; however, if they were to resume hostilities, then the Muslims would fight back until victorious. One is inspired to note that even in this context of war, the verse concludes by emphasizing the divine attributes of mercy and forgiveness. To minimize hostilities, the Qur'an ordered Muslims to grant asylum to anyone, even an enemy, who sought refuge. Asylum would be granted according to the customs of chivalry; the person would be told the message of the Qur'an but not coerced into accepting that message. Thereafter, he or she would be escorted to safety regardless of his or her religion. (9:6). (Hathout, Jihad vs. Terrorism; US Multimedia Vera International, 2002, pp.52-53, emphasis added)
Al Adl, Ansar. "Yusuf Estes Correcting Quran Misquotes." Yusuf Estes Correcting Quran Misquotes. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Dec. 2014.
I would also like to note that the “sacred months” from the provided interpretation of Mr. Martel is interpreted by some as “forbidden months” by some based on the historical context that the verse was revealed, as in, the months that fighting with the “idolaters” is forbidden because a treaty was active. In that way, the “forbidden/sacred months” of the verse is thought to be a reference to the three-month no hostility agreement spoken of above in the tafsir.

Zackery Martel 1:03 AM  

You have a very benign interpretation of 9:5, and I urge you to convince all Muslims to follow your interpretation.

The way it has played out in history is to slay non-Muslims during the battle, and if some surrender, to give them the option of becoming either Muslims, dhimmis, or headless.

staten 7:06 AM  

A said:

"Think about it this way: If a translation conveyed the Koran perfectly, why would someone decide to translate the Koran even though translations already existed? After the first English translator, why was a second translation made by someone else?"

I don't know for sure why but what's wrong with other translations? What's wrong with Sahih International, Pickthall, Yusuf Ali, Shakir or Muhammad Sarwar translations? If all existing translations of the Koran can pass to the readers the central meaning or the most essential, most vital parts of the Koranic text without losing the central idea, then the work of translators is done. This is all we need in order to understand what the book's message is about. This was and still is true with regards to any books written in foreign languages , including the most antique books written in dead languages that no one speaks today. Why the Koran should be different?

" In conclusion, to this question, I say you can achieve as much understanding of the Koran by the translations of it as obtained by those who never look at them, however the original text should still be looked at in order to achieve so. As in, realize that any translation is not the Koran, not the verbatim word of God."

Pretty odd statement. On the one side you are agree that understanding of the Koran can be achieved by the translations, on the other side you say the translations are not the true Koran and therefore are not the words of God. I don't get it, what after all is "the true Koran and the true words of God"? What is superiority of the Koran written in Arabic over the translated Koran , say, in Russian in terms of meaning and the central idea?

Another thing. If the translated Koran , no matter how good it may be, still "is not the true words of God" because it's conveyed not in Arabic, it begs for question why in the world Allah choose to communicate his one and only true religion to all mankind in some obscure Quraish dialect that cannot be understood by all people, even by some Arabs as no one speak Quraish today ? While all languages having their nuances, how come that only Arabic is the only one with words and phrases that are literally untranslatable? How come that All-Knowing , All-Wise Allah could mislead millions of people because they don't understand the Quraish dialect and therefore don't get "the true words of God" correctly? Is Allah a very myopic deity or a prejudiced racialist favoring only the Arabs giving them upper hand in leading humanity to salvation?

staten 8:01 AM  

A said:

"Regarding the inconsistencies provided, the first two are contradictions, as said; however, they do not reflect incorrectness or inconsistencies within the Koran itself. They are things from another text, one that staten holds to be true, that do not reflect agreement or consistency with the Koran. To mention that the first two given examples are proof of incorrectness in the Koran is to cite that God does not exist as proof for the Koran’s incorrectness as both rely on previously held beliefs to be credible. "

No, they are not some abstract things not related to the Koran. They do reflect inconsistency of the Koran. First example. The Muslims and the Sura 16:103 claim that the Quran is in Arabic, "pure and clear”.

Wrong in many ways. The quranic Arabic cannot be considered "pure" because of the inclusion of many foreign words into the text . These words include Egyptian, Farsi , Hebrew, Syriac and Greek words. Altogether 275 alien words, according to Arthur Jeffries. If Arabic is the language of Allah, and therefore "pure and perfect", why then the need for the inclusion of words from other languages? No less valid question, how do we even know that the Qur‘an originally was in Arabic?

The second example is geography. Surah 11:44 claims the Ark came to rest on top of mount Judi. The Bible says that it was Mount Ararat (Genesis 8:4).

Why is such a discrepancy? What's wrong with Allah if he supposed to be the same God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus?

staten 10:45 AM  

A said

"As a side note, the goal of the “translations” of the Koran isn’t to properly translate, as is the case normally with any text. In that, preserving the grammar structure is not as important as preserving the gist/message of the text because what readers of the “translations” want in the end, really, is the message. And I say this now because the last interpretation I provide, I notice, does not stay true to the grammar structure of the original Arabic words; however, I notice that other interpretations that do (stay true to the grammar) are not, in some regard, better at conveying the message/concepts of the verse.
Case in point, the provided verse is not saying the Sun was found/seen on Earth by the “he” of the verse, hence the claim that this verse proves the Koran incorrectness does not hold true, as can be seen."


In your last message on the subject you using a very composite and convoluted reasoning. On the one hand you are agree that "The provided translation isn’t necessarily incorrect nor does it necessarily lose meaning". On the other hand you feel you need to explain away the same translation that supposed to be "correct without losing any meaning". At the end, we as readers , got an impression that we should not believe our own eyes nor to the translation of the verse. To get better understanding, we should play the word games referring first to Arabic back and forth and then comparing it to the given English translation. At the end, we finally got the "true" interpretation of the verse - "it" is not the sun and therefore "it" cannot be seen/found on Earth.

But the Koran tells us - directly or indirectly, but very clearly - that the texts in the Koran is clear, explained by Allah, and to be understood literally:

Sahih International: 3:138 This [Qur'an] is a clear statement to [all] the people and a guidance and instruction for those conscious of Allah.

Yusuf Ali: And We have indeed made the Qur'an easy to understand and remember: then is there any that will receive admonition?

The same we can find in : 3:7, 6:114, 11:1, 15:1, 18:1 and other verses.

From traditions and commentaries on the Koran we have the same idea . Al-Tabari:

"Then he said: For the sun and the moon, He created easts and wests (positions to rise and set) on the two sides of the earth and the two rims of heaven, 180 springs in the west of black clay - this is (meant by) God's word: 'He found it setting in a muddy spring [18:86],' meaning by 'muddy (hami'ah)' black clay - and 180 springs in the east likewise of black clay, bubbling and boiling like a pot when it boils furiously. He continued. Every day and night, the sun has a new place where it rises and a new place where it sets. The interval between them from beginning to end is longest for the days in summer and shortest for winter."49

From this hadith we see that al-Tabari clearly understood the quranic statement in 18:86 literally to be saying that the sun sets in a muddy spring found at the edge of the earth.

So, Muhammad in his Koran states a pure astronomical nonsense .
Based on that and many other blunders, inconsistencies and gross errors in the Koran , conclusion can be reached only one: this book cannot be from God. Any god. This book is a brainchild of Mohammad.

staten 5:51 PM  

A said...
"What I do object to is the taking of the verse out of its context. Had this verse been its own book, its own chapter even, then sure, no need to consider the verses immediately before it or after it, none at all if they are in nonexistence; however, this is not the case with this verse. It is ALWAYS logical to look at any given text’s context, always. Looking at context to interpret what something means is a reading skill............


Now, you talking about the verse 9:5 that allegedly taken "out of context". You say that context of 9:5 is 9:6. But it's not so. First off, you yourself don't give the context of 9:5. Instead, you quote another verse, the next verse. How can one verse of the Koran be the context of another? What will be the context of verse 9:6? Verse 9:7 or 9:3,4? This is not the way the verses of the Koran are written.

What is a context? Context is the circumstance or an information that is essential to understanding a situation under which a statement is made or an action undertaken. According to the Koran 15:9, verses of the Quran were written by Allah (perhaps zillions of years before the creation of Earth) , and a copy of the Quran has been preserved in heaven for eternity. The verses are supposed to be the guide to life. If Quranic verses are just the contexts of each other, where then do we find the guide to our life in the Koran? Logically, the Quranic verses cannot have any context whatsoever, because Allah didn’t write them on the background of particular circumstance or experience, according to the Koran.
But in reality each verse of the Koran indeed has its context because they were devised by Muhammad in the context of situations, aspirations and desires of Muhammad’s life. Also, you can get much of the known contexts of Quranic verses in the Tafsirs, hadiths and Muhammad’s Sira, if you have doubts.

Now, let's take 9:5 and 9:6. Verse 9:6 is not at all the context of verse 9:5, but is the actions commanded first in 9:5: “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-due, leave their way free to them…” This is action. Verse 9:5 commands Muslims to attack the idolaters after the sacred month (Ramadan) and slaughter them. 9:6 continues : as they are being slaughtered, if they seek forgiveness, expressing willingness, readiness or desire of embracing Islam – THEN and ONLY THEN grant them asylum and send them to a secure place. Without embracing Islam , continue slaughtering them wherever you find them. Verse 9:6 , in fact, only reconfirms the action stated in 9:5 - just because the idolaters won’t embrace Islam, they must be attacked and killed. So, verse 9:5 is truly the context of verse 9:6 , not vice versa as you claim. But whether you add verse 9:6 or not, meaning of the verse 9:5 does not change at all.

Verse 9:5 is not the only verse in the Koran calling for war and violence against non_Muslims. There are HUNDREDS of such verses permeating the Suras of the Quran. There is no place in the Qur'an where Muhammad commands Muslims to love people of other religions or atheists. By contrast, there are at least three dozen verses that tell Muslims to fight against non-Muslims and about 500 that speak of their place in Hell.

In the Mohammad's Koran Kafirs (non-Muslims) are just subhumans who got to be murdered, tortured, terrorized, enslaved, raped on orders of Allah aka Mohammad.

Anonymous 4:23 PM  

terrorist who also seem to use islam as a shield are just criminals. plain and simple thats a fact
any person born has morals built in inside some say its the soul. wrong and right is clear when it comes to things like killing so now tell me whats religion got to do with it nothing a criminal will do anything to meet his selfish objective thats a fact.
i leave you with a thought if a criminal robs a bank you don't blame the gun or the car or the book he used to justify it you blame the person and jail that criminal. criminal need to be dealt with religion is a doctrine alone there are many bad people preaching many thing from selling cocaine to untested unregulated pharmaceutical drugs. get better at catching and punishing the guilty criminals only, not labeling a religion or a book or a violent move or game its that simple. i repeat again and again there are good and bad people criminal will use anything to justify and religion is a tool.
your website is a waste of time attacking a doctrine attack the perversion of the doctrine that's the fix

Zackery Martel 9:34 PM  

If it was, in fact, a perversion of the doctrine, that would be the fix. But unfortunately, the violence perpetrated in Islam's name is not a perversion if the written doctrine. It is directly following Muhammad's word and deed, as it says 91 times in the Koran a Muslim should do.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

http://www.inquiryintoislam.com/2010/08/sacredness-of-mohammads-example.html

Anonymous 11:01 PM  

I am currently reading the Koran, and am a non-Muslim, I am looking to find positive and enlightening aspects of this book and can find none. It is all commands to get rid of infidels, it is a book based on fear and death. I was looking to find something of a great read in it, but sadly I can find nothing of value.

in His Service 5:32 PM  




Because the Muhammad/ Allah placed verses in the Qur'an that conflict due to the changing attitude of Muhammad towards the unbelievers he (Allah/Muhammad) had to explain it somehow so this is what he did/said.

"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" Surah 2: 106

"When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not." Surah 16:101

The Qur'an is made up of two different types of chapters (surahs), ones that were sent down during Muhammad's time in Mecca and the others once he fled Mecca to Medina were sent down while he was in Medina so you basically have two Qur'ans if you want to call it that and then to top it all off the surahs are not in chronological order so you have to have a chart telling you which surah is belongs where.

The easiest way to figure it out is the nonviolent versus were sent down in Mecca in the beginning. Once he fled to Madinah the verses started getting more and more violent which is where you get the doctrine of abrogation. There is no verse in the call Ron that says a violent verse abrogates a peaceful verse but the doctrine is clearly there and the doctrine is followed. As a matter of fact without the doctrine of abrogation you would have no way of understanding the Qur'an.

I hope this helps clear things up.

in His Service 6:57 PM  

It's funny you claim prejudice but you know full well that Islamic doctrine is Qur'an AND Sunna so to claim the Qur'an doesn't tell Muslims to hurt non Muslims is a lie. Read Surah 9 "Repentence". Yusuf Ali's commentary is all in the present tense when he speaks about fighting so don't tell me that was for that time.

You know why Muslims say innocent people died in 911? Because Muslims died in the twin towers they are considered innocent but Kafir are not.

I personally wish you hadn't joined the military.

A 10:28 AM  

May peace be upon you, any who read this.

I read over what I previously wrote and I am utterly humbled how convoluted much of my reasoning was. However, of course, I concede nothing. I attribute my poor argumentation to the lack of my education--even now I am yet 16. Amazing what time does, I wonder if I will look at this in two or so years and see a similar poor quality. I apologize; I digress.

I wanted to reply with respect to staten's claim of an astronomical error in verse 18:86 of the Koran. Again, what horrible reasoning I employed before and I think the following is more concise:

Ibn Kathir-English (excerpt, emphasis is my own)
(Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,) means, he followed a route until he reached the furthest point that could be reached in the direction of the sun's setting, which is the west of the earth. As for the idea of his reaching the place in the sky where the sun sets, this is something impossible, and the tales told by storytellers that he traveled so far to the west that the sun set behind him are not true at all. Most of these stories come from the myths of the People of the Book and the fabrications and lies of their heretics.

(he found it setting in a spring of Hami'ah) meaning, he saw the sun as if it were setting in the ocean. This is something which everyone who goes to the coast can see: it looks as if the sun is setting into the sea but in fact it never leaves its path in which it is fixed. *end of excerpt*

I think before I got so excited to argue against the said claim, and so I made my own argument out of excitement, not realizing what I argued against made the fallacious assumption that, due to a lack of astronomical knowledge, the mentioned verse was once ambiguous; however, this was never the case.

Steven Thompson 11:13 PM  

Ibn Kathir - Sunni scholar of the Shafi'i school from the 14th century.

When we look at teaching or commentary on the Quran, we find that, over time, verses in the Quran that appear embarrassing are glossed over and explained away. This is true with Ibn Kathir as well, who wrote commentary 7 centuries after Muhammad.

If we want to find out what those verses really mean, we must look at how the earliest and most respected Muslim sources understood the Quran and its verses.

Regarding sura 18:86, we see clearly that what this Quran verse states, in the clear fully explained Book (Quran), is exactly what was meant - according to Muhammad - with no need to explain away...

hadith narrated by Abu Dharr quoted as follows:
“Abu Dharr was with The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) during the sunset. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) asked him: ‘Do you know, O Abu Dharr where this sun sets?’ He answered; ‘Allah and His messenger know best.’ The Messenger said: ‘It sets in a spring of slimy water’” – al-Zamakhshari, The Kahshaf (3rd Edition, Vol. 2, p. 743, 1987)

Don't let any late scholars fool you. The Quran itself, in most cases, should be quite clear to understand, just as the Quran states:

Quran 6:114 Shall I seek a judge other than Allah while it is He Who has sent down unto you the Book (The Qur'an), explained in detail (Hilali-Khan)

Quran 16:89 And We have sent down on thee the Book making clear everything, and as a guidance and a mercy, and as good tidings to those who surrender. (Arberry)

Quran 41:3 A Book whereof the Verses are explained in detail; A Qur'an in Arabic for people who know (Hilali-Khan)

Quran 39:48 An Arabic Quran, without any crookedness, that they may take heed.

screwbiedooo 7:27 AM  

Excellent piece, well written. I myself am sick to death of non-Muslims, who have never seen a koran or a hadith, telling the world they know Islam better than the jihadis, who have it all memorised and live by it every day.

Zackery Martel 7:39 PM  

Good point, screwbiedooo, and well said.

Copyright

All writing on CitizenWarrior.com is copyright © CitizenWarrior.com 2001-2099, all rights reserved.

Article Spotlight

One of the most unusual articles on CitizenWarrior.com is Pleasantville and Islamic Supremacism.

It illustrates the Islamic Supremacist vision by showing the similarity between what happened in the movie, Pleasantville, and what devout fundamentalist Muslims are trying to create in Islamic states like Syria, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia (and ultimately everywhere in the world).

Click here to read the article.


Citizen Warrior Heroes

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Visit the blog: Citizen Warrior Heroes.

No More Concessions to Islam

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Visit the blog: Concessions to Islam.

  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP