| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Sura 16, “The Bee,” is another in the string of late Meccan suras that began with sura 10. Its title comes from v. 68, which tells us that Allah taught the bee to do what bees do.
Verses 1-19 emphasize that Allah has created all things, and provides for all of humanity’s needs, and that all created beings bear witness to him. Ibn Kathir says that the “ways that turn aside” from the Straight Path of Islam (v. 9) are “various opinions and whims, such as Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism.” The Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs concurs, saying: “it is Allah Who guides to monotheism, and some of the religions are crooked and unjust such as Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism. And if Allah had willed, He would have guided you all to His religion.” So once again, belief or unbelief is up to Allah, not to the individual.
Verses 20-42 highlight the perversity of the unbelievers, and their impending judgment by Allah. The objects of their worship are themselves created (v. 20), and they scoff that Muhammad’s revelations amount only to “tales of the ancients” (v. 24). That is, they suggest that Muhammad wasn’t receiving the words of Allah from Gabriel and transmitting them to the people, but only relating old stories: “they say,” according to the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, [that] these [revelations] are, ‘fables, lies, of the ancients’, in order to lead people astray.” On Judgment Day these people will not only bear the weight of their own sins, but “also (something) of the burdens of those without knowledge, whom they misled” (v. 25). They will be condemned to hell (v. 29), while the righteous will dwell in the bountiful gardens of Paradise (v. 32).
The unbelievers will complain that “if Allah had so willed,” they and their forefathers never would have worshipped anyone but Allah (v. 35) – a reasonable complaint, in light of the Qur’an’s repeated statements about Allah leading people astray and having the ability to make everyone believers if he had desired (see 10:99-100). But here this excuse is rejected, since Allah has sent messengers to every people, telling them to worship Allah alone (v. 36). Ibn Kathir tries to mitigate the harshness of the idea that if Allah had willed, all mankind would believe, by explaining that Allah doesn’t actually want anyone to disbelieve, and sends them messengers so that they won’t do so, but simply allows them to if they so choose: “The legislative will of Allah is clear and cannot be taken as an excuse by them, because He had forbidden them to do that upon the tongue of His Messengers, but by His universal will (i.e., by which He allows things to occur even though they do not please Him) He allowed them to do that as it was decreed for them. So there is no argument in that for them. Allah created Hell and its people both the Shayatin (devils) and disbelievers, but He does not like His servants to disbelieve.” Allah does not guide those whom “He leaves to stray” (v. 37) — that is, Ibn Kathir continues, “the one whom He has caused to go astray, so who can guide him apart from Allah? No one.” For Allah accomplishes everything he intends to do (v. 40), and “nothing,” says Ibn Kathir, “can stop Him or oppose Him.”
Meanwhile, “those who leave their homes in the cause of Allah” will be rewarded in both this world and the next (v. 41). They are, according to the Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, the Muslims who fled Mecca with Muhammad and settled in Medina; Ibn Kathir, however, identifies them as the Muslims who earlier fled to Abyssinia to escape the persecution of the pagan Quraysh.
Verses 43-96 repeat many of these themes: Allah will judge those who plot against the Muslims (vv. 45-47; 84-89); created things bear witness to him (v. 48-50; 64-69; 79-82); Allah is the only god (v. 51); Satan is the patron of those who reject Allah’s messengers (v. 63); Muhammad’s duty is only to warn people of the impending judgment (v. 82). The polytheists even dare to say that Allah has daughters, while they themselves have sons (v. 57). The Tafsir al-Jalalayn explains that “to Him they assign daughters, to whom they are averse, when [in any case] He is [exalted] beyond having offspring, while to themselves they assign sons, of their own choosing, so that the best is theirs exclusively.” Allah’s sovereignty over all is reaffirmed in v. 93, which the Tafsir al-Jalalayn glosses as: “For if God had willed, He could have made you one community, people of a single religion, but He leads astray whom He will and guides whom He will, and you will surely be questioned, on the Day of Resurrection, a questioning of rebuke, about what you used to do, so that you might be requited for it.”
Verses 97-128 defend Muhammad and the Qur’an against some of the charges of the unbelievers, and call all people again to accept Muhammad’s message, which is the message of Abraham (v. 123), and worship Allah alone. Allah laments that whenever he abrogates a verse of his revelation and replaces it with another, the unbelievers accuse Muhammad of making it all up (v. 101). But actually Muhammad’s revelations come from the Holy Spirit (v. 102) – that is, Gabriel. The unbelievers claim that Muhammad is learning the contents of the Qur’an from a man and then passing them off as divine revelation, but the one they have in mind is a foreigner, while the Qur’an is in pure Arabic (v. 103). Ibn Kathir grants that “maybe the Messenger of Allah used to sit with him sometimes and talk to him a little, but he was a foreigner who did not know much Arabic, only enough simple phrases to answer questions when he had to.” Who was this mysterious foreigner whom the Qur’an is so anxious to diminish in importance? Some suggest Muhammad’s wife’s uncle Waraqa, who first identified him as a prophet, and who used to, according to Islamic tradition, “write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write.” Or it may have been one of Muhammad’s early companions, Salman the Persian: the Arabic word translated here as “foreign” is Ajami, which also means Persian.
Then in v. 106, in a notable departure from the Christian concept of martyrdom, Allah allows Muslims to deny their faith when under “compulsion,” as long one’s heart remains “firm in Faith.” Ibn Kathir explains: “This is an exception in the case of one who utters statements of disbelief and verbally agrees with the Mushrikin [unbelievers] because he is forced to do so by the beatings and abuse to which he is subjected, but his heart refuses to accept what he is saying, and he is, in reality, at peace with his faith in Allah and His Messenger.” This is another foundation for the idea of religious deception in Islam, which we saw in discussing 3:28.
The sura ends with a brief discussion of food laws, and instructions to Muhammad to “invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching” (v. 125).
Next week: Sura 17, “The Night Journey”: Why Islam claims Jerusalem as one of its holy cities.
(Here you can find links to all the earlier "Blogging the Qur'an" segments. Here is a good Arabic Qur’an, with English translations available; here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)
Posted by Robert at February 18, 2008 7:11 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Robert,
I have a question regarding Qur'anic translations.
You've written before that the Qur'an should traditionally be read and recited in Arabic, and this is one reason why many Western Muslims have little knowledge of what is actually in the book.
And yet we have numerous translations in English and other languages. So doesn't that make men like Pickthall and Ali kind of heretical? And yet these men seem to be highly respected, and as far as I know English translations of the Qur'an aren't being denounced by Muslims. Why is this?
Posted by: Ben![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 18, 2008 7:32 AM
Ben,
No, Pickthall and Ali were pious Muslims who believed in the proposition that the Qur'an could not be translated. They were careful to label their translations as but renderings of the meaning of the Qur'an. The most common edition of Pickthall's for years was called just that: "The Meaning of the Glorious Koran."
In other words, they were not claiming to be rendering the thing itself into English, and were preserving the idea that the Qur'an itself, in its essence, can only be in Arabic. So for that they were not heretics, and their translations have been valued by Muslims for the purposes of proselytization.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at February 18, 2008 7:40 AM
There is a Power in the Final Word of God
There is a Power in the Final Word of God…the Islam. This power is like power of flow of water which has its mysterious ways of travel. You try to stop or put barriers in its flow; those very barriers and stops tend it to raise its level and flow over the brims or it takes down to go under ground and travel. But it always finds its way to flow. And then this water flows like streams. Streams turn into riverine which pour into rivers. Thus the water when in rivers, it travels and travels; touching many a civilizations; nurturing them, transforming them and giving them the glad tiding of peace and plenty. And finally it deluges into fathomless, huge oceans…making…the towering waves.
There have always been certain forces at play that they envy this flow a lot. Many a stooges keep on mustering their muscles and exercising their (futile) efforts with intent to blemish and frustrate the plan of God; but ‘this water... the Word of God’ keeps on flowing.
-----------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for none
at February 18, 2008 7:48 AM
“For if God had willed, He could have made you one community, people of a single religion, but He leads astray whom He will and guides whom He will, and you will surely be questioned, on the Day of Resurrection, a questioning of rebuke, about what you used to do, so that you might be requited for it.”
Let me get this straight.
Allah could have made us all followers of Islam.
He decided not to for whatever (un)reason so we had no choice in the matter one way or another as it was pre-ordained.
He then decides to punish us for not being Muslim and consigns all us Kufrs to hell.
Meanwhile his brainwashed hordes go to heaven and consume alcohol, have homosexual relations with boys, have innumerable Houris in a sort of Muslim Valhalla.
No fair, I say.
Hatred for the Kufr, Love for "the best of all peoples"
Posted by: ericthekuffar at February 18, 2008 8:20 AM
There is a Power in the Final Word of God…the Islam. --posted by A Khokar
Mr. Khokar, "the Islam" is not the "final word of God." Let me clue you in - "allah" doesn't exist. Mohammed flim-flammed you people.
The final word of God, the only God, is called "The Bible."
And, as far as this goes:
"Love for all, Hatred for none." Excuse me, Mr. Khokar, but no one with any brains believes that Islamic "taqiyya" anymore. From both the contents of the Qur'an and world events, Mohammedans are the biggest "haters" of all.
at February 18, 2008 8:54 AM
"which tells us that Allah taught the bee to do what bees do."
Uh Huh. And unicorns are real.
Posted by: darcy at February 18, 2008 9:04 AM
"So once again, belief or unbelief is up to Allah, not to the individual."
Since Allah has already decided that the unbelievers will be unbelievers, why are the faithful supposed to struggle against them? Wouldn't that be trying to undo Allah's will? That sounds like blasphemy.
Also, why does Allah create the unbelievers in the first place? Does he take delight in sending them to everlasting torment in Hell? That's not what I would call a loving and merciful god.
The only answer I can see is that the unbelievers are created as inferior beings, scarcely better than dumb animals, to be the slaves and servants of the believers, who are the only true humans. But still, why send them to eternal torment? Are donkeys, sheep, and camels sent to Hell? Also, with their calls to convert the entire world to Islam, aren't Moslems trying to undo Allah's plan? This too sounds like blasphemy.
Or maybe it's all a fiction dreamed up by Mohammad.
at February 18, 2008 9:06 AM
Or maybe it's all a fiction dreamed up by Mohammad.
Posted by: ebonystone at February 18, 2008 9:06 AM
Yes. But I would say "cooked up" rather than "dreamed up" because his "prophet plan" wasn't accidental - it was purposely created by Mo with the goal of gaining power by pretending prophethood.
at February 18, 2008 9:40 AM
"There is a Power in the Final Word of God..."
There is power in EVERY word of God, and I'm not so sure he's finished speaking.
"And finally it deluges into fathomless, huge oceans…making…the towering waves.
This must be some of that Islamic science I've been hearing about. I'm sorry, but towering waves are caused by wind and atmospheric conditions. In other words, towereing waves are caused by the weather, not by rivers feeding into the oceans.
Nice try, but many of us kafir stooges have watched the Weather Channel, at one time or another. I live in a place that's subject to a yearly hurricane season, so you can trust me on this.
Posted by: Abscedere at February 18, 2008 9:52 AM
Allah is really unstable, he leads some people deliberately astray, creates some people specifically for Hell, and does not 'guarantee' muslims heaven no matter how good they are,
(unless you die in jihad). Mohammad made some remark about only one in a thousand getting into heaven, and claimed the capacity was 70,000. Since for muslims, everything is for Allah, and their greatest hope and aspiration is heaven, it must scare the...out of them to know that they 'tried so hard, but in the end it really didn't matter', (a line from a song), Allah burned them anyway. I think this generates an anxiety/instability/insecure, state of mind which may explain some muslim behavior.
The desire to impress Allah, and increase the chances of getting into Allah's heaven of plenty, and plenty of sex, is what drives them. In this, they are the worlds greatest materialists, and most ruthless. Killing people for Allah, in jihad or with Shari'a rulings, in an attempt to secure themselves a place at Allah's table. This is selfishness to it's extreme conclusion.
Love for all, Hatred for none
Posted by: A Khokar
Since Allah loves no one, and hates everyone except some muslims, this statement is...Anti-Islamic...Khokar is in great danger ...from Allah. Also from his brothers who think it is their duty to hate what Allah hates, and may
consider him an apostate...
at February 18, 2008 10:14 AM
Love for all, Hatred for none
Posted by: A Khokar
Since Allah loves no one, and hates everyone except some muslims, this statement is...Anti-Islamic...Khokar is in great danger ...from Allah. Also from his brothers who think it is their duty to hate what Allah hates, and may
consider him an apostate...
Posted by: duh_swami at February 18, 2008 10:14 AM
Right. That platitude slogan is definitely anti-Islamic. It's also stupid and unrealistic. So, you don't hate child molesters? Rapists? How 'bout Nazis? What about the school shooters? Yeah - all worthy of being hated, not loved. Imbecile.
Posted by: darcy at February 18, 2008 10:19 AM
Dear Ericthekuffar , ebonystone and friends,
You referred:
The Surah 16:94. “For if God had willed, He could have made you one community, people of a single religion, but He leads astray whom He will and guides whom He will, and you will surely be questioned, on the Day of Resurrection, a questioning of rebuke, about what you used to do, so that you might be requited for it.”
If every thing is up to God and the human being is not left with any choices or options then the prime aim and the subject theme of our being here in the world and our test there of and the reward in the Hereafter also do not have any implications. With due respect; I would like to differ with Mr Robert Spencer in his resolve undertaken in the above verse. He has taken some reference from Tafsir al-Jalalayn to elaborate which, in his opinion glosses as above but it leaves us totally disillusioned.
In order to remove any ambiguity; the correct and appropriate translation taken from the Holy Quran by Malik Ghulam Farid is given here;
Al-Nahl ( Th Bee) Chapter 16 : Verse 94. The correct translation emphasising our choices and option is that; “And if Allah had enforced His will, He would surely have made you all one people; but He lets go astray him who wishes it, and guides him who wishes it, and you shall surely be questioned concerning that which you have been doing.”
Like wise the God says in Surah Hud Chapter 11 : Verse 119
“And if thy Lord had enforced His will, He would have surely made mankind one people; but they would not cease to differ.”
At other place in Al-Ma'idah Chapter 5 : Verse 49 Allah says; “And We have revealed unto thee the Book comprising the truth and fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Book, and as a guardian over it. Judge, therefore, between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their evil desires, turning away from the truth which has come to thee. For each of you We prescribed a clear spiritual Law and a manifest way in secular matters. And if Allah had enforced His will, He would have made you all one people, but He wishes to try you by that which He has given you. Vie then with one another in doing good works. To Allah shall you all return; then He will inform you of that wherein you differed;”
Where as, the above may clarifying your query; it also reveals the hidden intents of Mr Robert Spencer that how much busy he is, in down casting the true spirit of Religion of Islam and spreading despondency among common folks in order to mislead and adrift them away from the truth?
-----------------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for none
at February 18, 2008 11:04 AM
From the article: Some suggest Muhammad’s wife’s uncle Waraqa, who first identified him as a prophet, and who used to, according to Islamic tradition, “write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write.”
Comment: Waraqa Ibn Nawfal was a Christian Monk who could read and write Hebrew. Mohammed's first wife, Kadijah, provided for his welfare. When Mohammed told Kadijah of his vision in the cave, she thought the boy Mohammed was very cute. ---Kadijah was an illiterate widow of a Christian nobleman who was a famous silk merchant in Syria. She was about 40 years old when she married the 13-year-old Mohammed. He was her slave to begin with; he must have been very irresistible to her ---Waraqa, who lived off of Kadijah, flattered them by saying, "Oh Mohammed, you saw the Angle Gabriel who visited the Virgin Mary. Eh, my boy, you will surely become a great prophet."
God struck Waraqa Ibn Nawfal dead three days later. The Muslims up till these days say they don't know how Nawfal died, three days after saying the above.
at February 18, 2008 11:18 AM
"Where as, the above may clarifying your query; it also reveals the hidden intents of Mr Robert Spencer that how much busy he is, in down casting the true spirit of Religion of Islam and spreading despondency among common folks in order to mislead and adrift them away from the truth?" --posted by the Mohammedan A Khokar.
Unlike Mohammedans with their many varieties of hiding the truth (taqiyya; kitman; tu quoque), Robert Spencer has *no* "hidden intents." He reprints news articles about Islam that appear worldwide - they are facts. There is nothing "hidden."
The rest of your comment is overly-generalized and basically unintelligible, i.e. doesn't make sense.
However, here's the "truth" about Islam: It's a fiction perpetrated by Warlord con man Mohammed in order to pretend prophethood to gain power. And with a big sharp sword behind the pretense of prophethood. There is no "allah," a pagan moon deity of pre-Islamic lore.
RS is a Truth-Teller and as such he instructs and uplifts. On the contrary, all the Liar Mohammed did was kill people.
at February 18, 2008 11:55 AM
BTW, Khokar, it doesn't sound like you "love" RS - you total taqiyya hypocrite.
Posted by: darcy at February 18, 2008 11:57 AM
Darcy,
[Khokar, it doesn't sound like you "love" RS - you total taqiyya hypocrite.]
Your choice of vocabulary seems poor. Please don’t go that far. Every body knows few ‘F’ words.
Posted by: A Khokar at February 18, 2008 1:02 PM
Arabia was largely in a religious vacuum for thousands of years. Although the Jews were there (in small numbers) and Christianity had been preached there (it didn't flourish) this was a place of primarily tribal culture and pagan worship.
In this context, Muhamed borrowed freely from the existing written word; he stole large pieces of the Torah, the old Testament (Abraham and Gabriel), and the bible (Jesus second coming, i.e. the twelfth imam) and made up the rest based on his own tortured wishes and desires.
Islam is Anti-Christ. It is the work of the devil no matter who says it isn't. Remember the old saying, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a DUCK."
Well if it(Islam) talks like the devil, and does the devil's work, then it is of THE DEVIL.
Posted by: n.a. palm at February 18, 2008 1:06 PM
“And if Allah had enforced His will, He would surely have made you all one people; but He lets go astray him who wishes it, and guides him who wishes it, and you shall surely be questioned concerning that which you have been doing.”
So there is no question here of predestination, apparently we have a choice but only if we ever heard of Allah.
So if you were a native american, prior to the arrival of christianity or the koran for instance and could not read or write then logically you would not have heard of Allah. Does this mean that everyone who never had the means to hear of Allah is predistined for hell ?
Moh in his wisdom just condemned all the people who ever existed before he formulated his twisted fairy stories to hell.
Hows that for Al the merciful ?
Posted by: ericthekuffar at February 18, 2008 1:27 PM
Darcy,
[Khokar, it doesn't sound like you "love" RS - you total taqiyya hypocrite.]
Your choice of vocabulary seems poor. Please don’t go that far. Every body knows few ‘F’ words.
Posted by: A Khokar at February 18, 2008 1:02 PM
On the contrary, Mohammedan, my vocabulary is quite rich.
What is "Every body (oh, it's Everybody, one word, your spelling is quite poor) knows few F words" supposed to mean? It makes no sense. Your English is very, very poor, Mohammedan. Why don't you get some sort of translator so people can understand your unintelligible sentences?
Posted by: darcy at February 18, 2008 2:06 PM
A Khokar wrote:
Thus the water (Islam) when in rivers, it travels and travels; touching many a civilizations; nurturing them, transforming them and giving them the glad tiding of peace and plenty.
..........................................
Ah, yes, Islam transforming societies into lands of peace and plenty.
That is why rapes have tripled in Scandinavian countries in the past twenty years, largely due to Muslim assailants that have come with the rapid increase in Muslim immigration. That is why Muslim-majority Albania is the poorest country in Europe, and is devastatd by a violent culture of primitive tribal revenge.
That's why Nigeria, turning from English common law, is now stoning rape victims under Shari'ah. That is why jihadists in Indonesia are beheading Christian schoolgirls, and jihadists in Thailand are shooting Buddhist monks, and jihadists in Iraq are coercing developmentally disabled women to blow up families and children out for a day of fun at a pet market .
That is why Afghanistan under the Taliban--perhaps the most "Islamic" place on earth in recent memory--used Kabul's Western-funded Ghazi stadium not for soccer games or other sporting events, but for brutal public floggings, amputations, and executions, including pushing brick walls over on victims buried up to their chests in the pitch.
Thank you, I'll pass on such "glad tidings".
Posted by: gravenimage at February 18, 2008 2:57 PM
Hey darcy, et all, I have been trying to engage Mr. Khokar in a rational discussion since last week when Mr. Spencer posted:
Khokar:
Can you point to a single thing in my exposition of Sura 15, or any other part of the Qur'an, that is actually false?
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at February 11, 2008 8:22 AM
His responses have been long, rambling and defy logic. His not being able to answer the question is all the answer I think we need. We know what he is. “Love for all” only applies to Moslems. It is best to ignore him.
at February 18, 2008 4:27 PM
Dear All,
Possibly it doesn't need any explanation and it is evident that here the author of ‘Quran Blogging’ is all out to misrepresent the divine Order of the Glorious Quran with his intent to throw as many hurdles as he can to obscure and conceal the Truth- the Word of God from the common Blow Joe in the street.
Then can he be graded as Friend or he is a Foe of Muslims?
If he is a well wisher and a friend; and if he thinks that Quran is a Divine Book and Muhammad* is the Last Holy Prophet of God and probably the Muslims of present age , in his opinion are on some wrong footings in following the commandments and execution of the divine orders in it true spirit. That he himself feels so competent to suggest a better solution to the present day prevalent precarious state of affairs in the Muslim World (as he often portrays in his articles); then he will be seen definitely doing some thing good in the service of God as a good friend. He will be seen showing wisdom and being a scholar will demonstrate giving a meaningful explanation of the latest revelation contained in the Quran so the better understand by the followers . But if we find the results are otherwise then he stands there as a Foe?
From my earlier post: ( A Khokar at February 18, 2008 11:04 AM found above) ; it is amply clear that how an ambiguity may arise by merely changing the simple meanings of the words and how the true spirit is lost in translations.
Being a good friend of Muslim he may not be engaging himself in such fallacious acts; and all his other accomplices will also not be found orchestrating the Negative Notes on this web site about Islam.
Our God is a living God and He speaks to us through his chosen people; called Messengers. God needs not to ask us to render Him permission, to when and to whom so ever He chooses His Messenger. Every human being has got a built in, his inner conscious; designed to recognise and submit to the divinely revelations and respond to the divinly calls of Messengers of God, when ever they come.
May God guide us in the right path; the path of those on whom God hast bestowed His blessings, those who have not incurred His displeasure, and those who have not gone astray. Amen
--------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None
at February 18, 2008 8:48 PM
A Khokar
I am a Messenger of God, and I tell you the Quran is not glorious and is a fabrication. If you want to know the true God then repent (that means change your mind about what you believe) and ask Jesus to forgive your sins and become a follower of Him. He is the true and living God.
He Loves you, and born the Fathers hatred.
John 5:19-24
. . . Whatever the Father does, the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and tells him everything he is doing, and the Son will do far greater things than healing this man. You will be astonished at what he does. He will even raise from the dead anyone he wants to, just as the Father does. And the Father leaves all judgment to his Son, so that everyone will honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. But if you refuse to honor the Son, then you are certainly not honoring the Father who sent him. I assure you, those who listen to my message and believe in God who sent me have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from death into life.
جون 5:19-24
وأيا كان الاب لا ، هل الابن ايضا. لالآب يحب الابن ويروي له كل ما يقوم به ، والابن يفعل أشياء أكبر بكثير مما كان شفاء هذا الرجل. إنك ستكون استهجن في ما يفعل. وقال انه سوف يثير حتى من الموتى اي شخص يريد ، كما ان الاب لا. والد جميع يترك الحكم لابنه ، بحيث يحصل كل فرد على ابن شرف ، تماما مثلما شرف الأب. ولكن اذا كنت ترفض شرف الابن ، ثم أنت بالتأكيد ليس تكريم الاب الذي لا وجه له. واود ان اؤكد لكم ، اولئك الذين يستمعون الى رسالتي وآمنت بالله الذي ارسل لي الحياة الابديه. انها لن تكون أبدا ادانت لخطاياهم ، ولكن لديهم بالفعل انتقل من الموت الى الحياة.
Here is a hint of the astonishing thing he did. After dieing on the cross for your sins he came back to life from the dead. This he told before hand. Mohammad is still in the ground, Jesus is not, big difference. Praise His Name!
Posted by: Im.mad.as.HELL! at February 18, 2008 10:07 PM
Possibly it doesn't need any explanation and it is evident that here the author of ‘Quran Blogging’ is all out to misrepresent the divine Order of the Glorious Quran with his intent to throw as many hurdles as he can to obscure and conceal the Truth- the Word of God from the common Blow Joe in the street.
Using the word "order" in relation to the Koran is a stretch. More like "confused jumble".
Any religion that relies on the premise that it is the "pure" form of two prior religions and that those two prior religions were falsified by men for the purposes of some type of gain is anything but "orderly". The layering of improbability on top of improbability on top of improbability suggests a delusionary origin for Islam, not a divine origin. Islam is like a living proof of Nietzsche's contention that the last thing the masses want is truth. That you would use the word "truth" in relation to Islam makes me want to vomit.
Posted by: venividivici at February 18, 2008 11:51 PM
In order to furnish a correct prospective of the subject Surah Chapter 16 AL-NAHL; The Bee; a short commentary is reproduced here under for the guidance and to clarify any misconception please.
Chapter 16. Al-Nahl; THE BEE
Subject-Matter
This Surāh was revealed at Mecca. Quite appropriately the Surāh has been given the title of Al-Nahl (lit. the Bee), because by a reference to the natural instincts of the bee which has been termed ‘Wahy’(Revealation) in the Qur’an (16:69) attention is drawn to the fact that the entire universe depends for its smooth and successful working on Wahy, whether manifest or hidden, direct or indirect. This subject constitutes the picot or basic theme of the Surāh. Moreover, the subject of Jihad has been introduced here as an important subject. As Jihad was to become the target of attacks from all quarters, it is hinted that, like honey, which is protected by the bee from undue interference by its God-given sting, the Qur’an which is a storehouse of spiritual honey shall be protected by the use of force which Muslims will have to employ to protect it. Believers are then told that if they with their kith and kin to accept the Qur’an they should see that their own hearts are cleansed because without purity of heart it is impossible to know God. God does not compel anyone to accept the truth, because by using force the very purpose of religion in defeated.
Next, the Surāh enters into a discussion of the Life after death and it is stated that even in this world nations are resurrected and given a new life, and it is with their Hijrah (Emigration) that their resurrection begins. Accordingly, the Holy Prophet also would have to leave his native place and immigrate to Medina because it was essential for the spiritual development of its followers that they should be separated from disbelievers and be educated and trained in the teaching of their religion in congenial environments. From this the conclusion is drawn that id it is so necessary for the permanent spiritual advancement of man that he should undergo a spiritual Hijrah (Emigration) which is another name for death. After this Hijrah Emigration the Faithful and the disbelievers begin to travel on separate paths, the disbelievers go to Hell and the Faithful bask in the sunshine of Devine Grace and scale the heights of atonement with God. The subject that great and wholesome results will flow from the Holy Prophets Hijrah (Emigration) is continued. The Surāh proceeds briefly to deal with the question why respite is granted to disbelievers and why they are not forced to accept the Truth. This leads to the treatment of the objection that id the Holy Prophet is a true Messenger of God, why is he teaching at variance with that of earlier Prophets. In answer to this objection it is stated that the real teaching which former Prophets gave to their peoples greatly different from the current, adulterated and corrupt teachings attributed to them.
In fact, a new Prophet comes only when former Teachings become corrupt and lose their title to the Devine inspiration, the bee collects its food from fruits and flowers and converts it into delicious and wholesome honey, it is the fitness of things that for his moral regeneration and spiritual development man should be guided by revelation, and proceeds to say that just as honey caries in quality, so are all men not of equal spiritual development. Like the different colours and flavours of honey, revelations of various Prophets also are of different patterns. Then one more argument is given to establish the need of Devine revelation. When with the passage of time people became separated from the era of a Prophet and vested interest grow up and become entrenched and privileges flow from father to son and all natural avenues of progress and advancement are closed upon the common man. God raises a new Prophet, who wages a relentless war against this tyranny of man against man, and the so-called leaders who erstwhile enjoyed monopoly of power and benefit are dethroned from seats of authority and the common men who follow the new Prophet take their place. The chains of bondage of men are broken and they begin to breathe in an atmosphere of true freedom.
Next, disbelievers are warned that great changed which are decreed to be brought about by means of the Qur’an would take place very soon. The time cries for a change and the new Message possesses all the essential qualities and ingredients of a perfect Teaching. The followers of this new Teaching will succeed and all power and dominion will pass into their hands. A veritable way will be waged against the disbelief and its leaders will be destroyed. Towards the end of the Surāh the Holy Prophet is told that the sphere and scope of his preaching should now widen and embrace in its orbit Christians and Jews. This would excite a new opposition and Muslims would suffer persecution from all quarters; but the Devine cause of Islam would continue to grow and prosper amid opposition and persecution, and its enemies would meet with their deserved fate.
-----------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None
at February 19, 2008 9:21 AM
A Khokar - all sizzle, no steak.
Posted by: tanstaafl at February 19, 2008 9:34 AM
Go away, Mohammedan - we don't buy your overblown rhetoric that is a tapestry of taqiyya and lies with which you have been brainwashed.
Islam is a cruel, evil, barbaric hoax made up by psycho Mo to gain power as a "prophet." He put to use al-ilah the pre-Islamic pagan moon deity as Allah - I repeat, pagan moon deity. There is no "allah."
Mo is not a prophet, and allah doesn't exist. A Western 6th grader could read the Koran and discern it as a hoax. Since you have been indoctrinated by it since birth, I suppose you can't. Others smarter than you have, however - Ibn Warriq, Ali Sina, Ibn Misr, Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Walid Phares, Salman Rushdie and many others.
You're just a brainwashed human 'bot. BTW, the Koran is not "glorious," in fact it's spurious (not genuine; false). Ah, the Spurious Qur'an, responsible for so much horror and evil that has occurred in the world.
"That you would use the word "truth" in relation to Islam makes me want to vomit."
Posted by: venividivici at February 18, 2008 11:51 PM
I'll second that. And I hate vomiting, even if I have the flu.
at February 19, 2008 9:44 AM
Arrogant; they will say 'Nay' to any word of wisdom.
at February 19, 2008 11:26 AM
Arrogant; they will say 'Nay' to any word of wisdom.
Posted by: A Khokar at February 19, 2008 11:26 AM
LOL! You have *NO* "words of wisdom," Mohammedan. You are just a brainwashed imbecile who worships something that doesn't exist. When it comes time for you to pass, you will see that.
And, as far as "arrogant" goes - it's not arrogance, it's that we know the truth about Islam - that it's a pack of lies - while you're a Mohammedan brainwashed 'bot. Now, go and whack your head on the floor, no wonder you're all nuts!
"It's not the Glorious Qur'an, it's the Spurious Qur'an!" (tm)
Posted by: darcy at February 19, 2008 12:41 PM
Hi Ericthekuffar,
Your post dated Februay 18, 2008 1:27 PM refers:
We all are subjects of our gracious God; who is the most merciful, and forgiving. He is a kind sustainer. We believe in One who shows His mercy graciously and extensively to all the creations of the world with out regard to their effort or work.
You have raised a point;” Does this mean that everyone who never had the means to hear of Allah is predestined for hell ?
I will say No; definitely No. Allah says in [2:287] “Allah burdens not any soul beyond its capacity.” And Our Lord does not burden any one who has not the strength to bear it and it is beyond doubt that God may not punishes me when I even have got no knowledge of a thing. God also may not punish some one if he forgets or falls in error.
To further elaborate it. We will read in [22.18] Allah says “As to those who believe, and the Jews and the Sabians, and the Christians, and the Magians and the idolaters; verily, Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection. Surely, Allah watches over all things.”
And matter is further conferred in [2:63] “Surely, those who believe and the Jews and the Christians and the Sabians - whichever party from among these truly believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good deeds, shall have their reward with their Lord, and no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve.”
The Glorious Quran bears the light for the entire mankind. In [14:2] Allah says; “ Alif Lam Ra. This is a Book which We have revealed to thee that thou mayest bring mankind out of the depths of darkness into light, by the command of their Lord, to the path of the Mighty, the Praiseworthy –
I hope this will suffice for the time being.
With best of regards
A Khokar
----------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None
at February 19, 2008 8:35 PM
No. It does not suffice for the time being. It does not suffice at all. You slide out all these pretty verses from your “holy” book to show the love for all and hatred for none while your brethren in every corner of the globe murder people screaming Allāhu Akbar using the same “holy” book for justification. You are in the wrong place here Muslim, no one is listening. Go preach those pretty verses to the Mujahideen.
Posted by: butterfly at February 19, 2008 9:42 PM
A rather nice exposition of the contrast between the Biblical and the Islamic theological/moral code, as given by regular poster exsgtbrown. It bears repeating, for the sake of those posters who have been attempting to get through to our hypnotised interlocutor, mr or ms a khokar. I have added some clarifying remarks.
"And God [i.e. YHWH] spoke all these words, saying: 'I am the LORD your God…
ONE: 'You shall have no other gods before Me.'
TWO: 'You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.'
THREE: 'You shall not take the name of the LORD [i.e. YHWH] your God in vain.'
FOUR: 'Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.'
FIVE: 'Honor your father and your mother.'
SIX: 'You shall not murder.'
SEVEN: 'You shall not commit adultery.'
EIGHT: 'You shall not steal.' [Note: this is an open-ended command]
NINE: 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.' [ANY neighbour]
TEN: 'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'
In Islam,[ the following principles, either explicitly stated, or clearly implied by Quran-Sira-Hadith]:
1) I am Allah, you must submit to me [note: allah enslaves people, whereas YHWH brought people OUT of slavery]
2) You must idolize the black stone
3) You must curse all that is not Islam
4) You must pray 5 times a day whether you want to or not
5) Kill your father and mother if they dishonor Islam
6) Kill the unbelievers, actively pursuing all who refuse to submit
7) You should have many wives, concubines and female slaves to do with as you please. Married women may be taken as slaves and f***ed even if their husbands are still alive – you can pretend that their marriages are dissolved by your capture of said women.
8) You should actively raid the caravans and cities of the Non-Muslims, taking all valuables while destroying all that you cannot carry...
9) It is permissible to lie for Islam, it is permissible to deceive for Islam, it is mandatory to lie at every possible opportunity....
10) You should bear false witness against your neighbor so that you can behead him, and take his wife and daughters for your sexual pleasure and you can take his property, his church, his donkeys, anything that was his is now yours....
...I like God’s ten commandments better than allah’s ten commandments...
...it is so simple...Ban Muslim Immigration..."
Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 16, 2008 7:49 AM.
at February 20, 2008 3:15 AM
Tanstaafl , February 19, 2008 9:34 AM
You have to be in it to win it… because; No Sizzle, No steaks
And you know; when the corn cob comes to sizzle; only then it starts bursting into… laughter.
-----------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None
at February 20, 2008 11:31 AM
Dumbledoresarmy wrote on February 20, 2008 at 3:15 AM.
Yes; I agree 100 percent with the findings of your mentor exgtbrwn as he likes to submit….but for serial number 1 only.
[1) I am Allah, you must submit to me].
For rest of the serials; I think the man has been digging under some wrong tree?
-----------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None
at February 20, 2008 11:49 AM
Im.mad.as.HELL! wrote on February 18, 2008 at 10:07 PM
Looking at the verses of John 15:14-24
14: Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.
15: Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.
16: Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
17: These things I command you, that ye love one another.
18: If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.
19: If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
20: Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.
21: But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me.
22: If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin.
23: He that hateth me hateth my Father also.
24: If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father.
------------------------------
Dear Messenger,
You forgot to check your postal Bag today at home. Man; above verses do not say; what all you are trying to bluster?
Better start digging again but under the right tree.
------------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for None
at February 20, 2008 12:19 PM
A khokar
there are all sorts of articles on jihadwatch that you could comment on. How about you try commenting on THIS one?
Remarks in square brackets are mine, offering a clarifying reading.
Thai Jihad Update: "Man burnt alive in Thailand," from AFP (thanks to Fanabba):
YALA (Thailand), Feb 19: A 46-year-old Buddhist man was shot and then set ablaze as he tried to escape an attack by suspected Islamic separatists [i.e. suspected Muslim jihadis] on Tuesday in Thailand’s Muslim-majority south, police said.
Netr Noh-uma, a highway department official, was shot as he was riding a motorcycle with a colleague in Pattani, one of three provinces along the Malaysian border hit by four years of separatist unrest [i.e. four years of Jihad], police said.
A 34-year-old man was riding the motorcycle with him. He was also shot but managed to run away, police said.
Netr was too seriously wounded to escape. Police said that when he fell off the motorcycle, two militants [jihadis] doused him with petrol and set him on fire.
“They burned him alive after he was shot and fell from his motorbike.
Posted by Robert at February 20, 2008 8:35 AM".
'Love for all, hatred for none', eh? Excuse me while I puke.
And here's some Muslim spirituality, from an Indian Sufi Muslim 'saint', Sirhindi:
"The honour of Islam lies in insulting kufr and kafirs.
One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims...
The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to humiliate them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur.
They should constantly remain terrified and trembling.
It is intended to hold them under contempt and to uphold the honour and might of Islam."
Sufi saint Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624), letter #163
Do you, or do you not, accept Sirhindi as a fellow Muslim? Yes or No?
And if you do - do you, or do you not, concur with his clearly expressed belief that it is honourable for Muslims to abuse, to oppress, and to humiliate non-Muslims? Yes or No?
I don't see the tiniest glimmer of love anywhere there. I see a man encouraging his fellow-believers to fill themselves up with pride, arrogance, and cruelty, to look down on, and rob, and humiliate the powerless, and to ENJOY so doing.
Thirdly, here are Hugh Fitzgerald's coldly furious thoughts, prompted by a Muslim jihad murder of an unarmed Thai Buddhist civil servant:
"The Bamiyan Buddhas. All the Buddhas, all over Central Asia. All the stupas. All the libraries of Buddhist manuscripts that were not hidden. All the Buddhist monasteries reduced to rubble, wherever Islam finally triumphed, with perhaps a handful overlooked or through some ruler's indulgence, left semi-intact.
" The attacks on the last Buddhist enclave left -- the Chittagong Hills -- in Bangladesh.
"And the attacks on Buddhists, as Buddhists, or rather as non-Muslims, in southern Thailand.
"And if Thailand were to give up all of southern Thailand, who could believe for one minute that the attacks on what remained of Thailand would not be resumed, just as in the Philippines, if the Muslims in the south are given autonomy, are given even independence, they will resume attacking the next adjacent area, and then the next?
"Islam does not say: take this territory but not that. It says: the world, the land, belongs to Allah." [I note that Hugh records this belief: he does not for one minute endorse it: he despises its arrogant supremacism and overweening greed. Note that when Jews, or Christians, say 'the earth is YHWH's' they do not mean that the entire planet should be a Jewish, or a Christian, theocracy; YHWH'S rule explicitly leaves room for many nations, each inhabiting their own proper places].
"It is right, it is just, it is proper, it is necessary, [hear the sarcasm?] for all Muslims, as a central duty, to support Jihad, the struggle to remove all obstacles.
(it [that 'obstacle'] could be a fence, it could be an army, it could be a code of laws, it could be the Constitution of the United States, or the British Commmon Law, or the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man, or the Bible, or a hymn-book, or the collected works of Shakespeare or Dante or Pushkin, it could be the pictures of Rembrandt depicting rabbis and scenes from the Old Testament, it could be the pictures of Balthus depicting young girls, it could be Mozart, it could be Fats Waller, it could be anything or everything that could ever have come out of the world of Islam and could never, for one minute, survive in the kind of world that the Shari'a, the ideal code, the Holy Law of Islam, would bring into our world, with all its woe)."
Posted by: Hugh at February 20, 2008 9:01 AM
A Khokar: the murders of unarmed Buddhists by jihadis in Thailand; the sickening ugliness of Sirhindi's shameless supremacism; and the fact that a sharia caliphate would most assuredly destroy all those wonderful things that hugh lists in his final paragraph, and prevent any other such from coming into being ever again, is enough to convince me that all your pretty words are empty.
Unless you renounce jihad and sharia altogether, and (mayhap) become a bahaii, your pretty words are merely a smokescreen to prevent us from seeing the approach of a monster that would glut itself on all the beauty of the earth and leave behind only ruin and desolation.
And I repeat. The words of the Bible, both the Hebrew and the Christian Scriptures, are living water for the soul; but the words of the Quran are like a mirage, or, worse, like crack cocaine.
at February 20, 2008 11:54 PM
Dumbledoresarmy wrote; February 20, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Cry for Jihad
When ever there is news of any killing or loss of life is involved in any incident. Our Media is always ready to put it under their high held ‘colouring magnifier’ to connect it to any Muslim dissident faction and label it as Jihad. Other Media services are quick to respond and happy to spice up and present that news in the crystal goblet of ‘war on terror’.
There are many, many other dissident groups found operating in the world who are involved in remorseless killing of innocents. But the word ‘Terrorism’ is mostly restricted to single out the Muslims and their connection to their religious belief of Jihad. The term Jihad is used as a catch word and a quick way of ascribing of any news of killing to the fanatics groups, found in Muslim world…. And With out any hesitation!
Jihad in Islam is described in a very different way. This is an earnest effort put forward by a person into reformation of ones self or say, striving in the way of God to reform ones inner self to be a better person. Personal reformation takes the priority over reformation of society. Subject of ‘killing of an oppressor’ or ‘killing in defence’ comes at the very last on the list, as a lost resort. So in principle, it may not be fair to ascribe any killing of innocents to the religion Islam and malign the Muslims as such.
Any how, in the ‘contest of killing and jihad’, we have to see that:
a. Is Jihad fostered and cherished by Muslims only or do we also find some thing equivalent and comparable of Jihad which tantamount to the same meanings in other religions?
b. Are the people leading their lives in other religions i.e. in, Christianity ,Judaic, Buddha or Hindu societies have, some how thoroughly been humbled and emasculated or say, removed and civilised to that degree that they don’t have any urge left, to kill any body even when they are oppressed or in their ‘self defence; as a lost resort.
c. And what are the actual practices found on the ground. Where thousand and thousands of people are being put to death, their properties are destroyed and children and women being massacred and maimed. All this that we see, is being done then on what account?
The killing prescribed as a lost resort in Islam in defence or to raise arm against the oppressor, is too mild and looks peace loving than the commandments found in other religions. Surprisingly commandments found in other religions are much harsher.
For Instance the Christianity prescribes an instant killing of a person who worships any other god; other than the Lord or kill a person who come out to work on Sabbath day (Saturday). See the links at * & **.
‘Eye for an eye’ and ‘killed with the sword to be killed by the sword’ and like wise versions found in other religions are the subjects to be pondered upon, through colour less glasses only.
After all why we find that Middle Eastern countries where, predominantly Muslim nations live remain blazed in wars?
Why their entire society seems to be engulfed in an atmosphere of anarchy and violence. Why the killing and destruction is prevalent every where?
Who is the oppressor here? Who is the invader? Who is being killed and who is at rampage to kill?
A cry for Jihad is heard all over in the Middle Eastern world! Why?
What is the real cause or motivation behind this controversial out cry of extremism?
We all know that leading organisations like, Hamas and Hezbollah that we find in Middle East are the product of continuous oppression, deprivation and persecution spread over a many long, long years. They are the resistance organisations, fighting for their freedom and liberation of their home land and preferred way of life.
Spirit behind their cause and motivation is worth exploring.
History of freedom is universal and full of writings, written with the flowing blood of freedom fighters. Every sacrifice where the blood flows is counted a positive step forward and glorifiable in the eyes of martyrs by all the nations, till the time their oppressors concede and surrender.
Denial of freedom is death. Means of survival are limitless. The civilised world is to think cool for this and respect and reach for the cause behind each suicidal fatality.
Islam is peace loving religion and follows the laws of nature. Nature does not accept any suppression. When suppressed; You are bound to get Recoil Action.
Links recommended:
*The Bible: The Lord here commands the destruction of all the places where people worship other gods. There appears not a shred of religious tolerance here! ...
www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible3.htmihad is never said to be doomed or
**The Bible: Condemns those who worship any other than the biblical god. ... When he's done with the killing everyone will know that he is the Lord. ...
skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html -condemned. Generally word
----------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for none
at February 21, 2008 3:22 AM
A Khokar
The reference to 'wisdom and beautiful preaching' at the end of surah 16, when placed in the context of abundantly documented conduct of Muslim regimes toward non-Muslim neighbours, remind me of two things: the sort of burglar who inveigles his way into someone's house with a plausible story, but then, once inside, pounces upon and beats up the homeowner and robs him of everything he possesses; or the type of man who, though he will *commence* his wooing of a girl with flowers, chocolates, and sweet nothings, has every intention of kidnapping and raping her, should she refuse his blandishments and say NO.
Would you care to comment on the following 'catechism of hate' overheard being taught by a Pakistani jihadi in Britain, to his 5 year old son?
"Leader 'groomed children for terrorism,'" by Duncan Gardham in the Telegraph:
"In one recorded conversation of May 2006 he [Parviz Khan] was heard shouting at his five-year-old son when he made a mistake reading the Koran from heart.
He made him stand in front of him with his hands by his side and demanded: "Who do you love?"
The child answered: "I love Sheikh Osama bin Laden."
"And?" said Khan.
"Sheikh Abdel-Rahman" referring to the "Blind sheikh" in prison in the US.
"And?" asked Khan.
"Sheikh Abu Hamza" referring to the jailed imam at Finsbury Park Mosque in North London.
"Who do you kill?" asked Khan.
"America kill," said the boy.
"Who else you kill?" said Khan.
"Bush I kill," said the boy.
"And who else?" demanded Khan.
"Blair kill, both people kill."
"Who else you kill?" asked Khan.
"Saddam, Saddam," said the boy.
Then the pair began chanting at each other.
Khan said: "Kuffar [non-believers]" the boy said: "Kill."
Khan said: "Mushrik [polytheists]" and the boy said: "Kill."
Then it continued with: "Hindu?... Kill... Sheedi [blacks]?... Kill... Pathan [thieves]?...Kill...Sharab [alcohol]?...Kill...And who do you love?...Sheikh Osama bin Laden, I love."
Article brought to our attention here at jihadwatch, on February 18 2008, 9.18 am.
The attitude displayed by that man, and his son, is perfectly comprehensible as the direct fruit of the misrepresentations, contempt and hostility expressed toward Christians, Jews, and polytheists in Surah 16 (and, of course, in many other parts of the Quran, Sira and Hadith as well).
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at February 21, 2008 9:37 PM
Now, A Khokar, for your shameless whitewashing of the Jihad, and your ridiculous attempt to claim that all the poor, poor muslims are doing (that 'tiny minority of extremists'?) is righteously defending themselves against a wicked worldwide anti-Muslim conspiracy.
You accuse our media of bias against Muslims. Rubbish. Haven't you heard people at this site repeatedly griping about our MSM's continual kowtowing to Muslim sensibilities?
Quit with the conspiracy theories.
Now: you refer to other terror groups. Nice try at tu quoque, but it’s nonsense.
The existence of other terror groups driven either by Maoist ideology (in Nepal) or ethno-cultural local nationalism (Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, some Basques in Spain or France) does not alter the fact that there ALSO exists a peculiarly Muslim phenomenon – an extraordinary and proliferating number of violent military and paramilitary groups, all having Muslim names with heavy Muslim religious overtones, and driven by a specific ideology of world conquest 1400 years old; and doing and saying EXACTLY the same kinds of things that are recorded as done and said by the perpetrators of previous Muslim jihad assaults upon non-Muslim societies and non-Muslim people.
Jihadis justify their acts by Muslim ideology. They make recruits by invoking Muslim history and by citing Muslim sacred texts.
Your attempt to whitewash jihad as inner spiritual struggle, and then as self-defence or war of liberation, is Orwellian. I prefer to define it by the painful experience of its millions of innocent victims down the ages – for example, the killing of the Armenian Christians, or the mass slaughter, mass rapes, and mass enslavement of black animists and Christians in the southern Sudan. T
That definition fits perfectly as the fruit of a theology exemplified by this extraordinary passage from a sermon by Khomeini in 1981:
“The real Day of God is the day that Amir al mo’menin [Ali, Shi'ite Islam's first Imam] drew his sword and slaughtered all the khavarej [a group that rejected Ali's leadership] and killed them from the first to the last.
The Days of God are when Allah, the gracious, the almighty, causes an earthquake. It is when He slaps on the face. It is when he causes a hurricane. He whips this people to become humans.
If the Amir al mo’menin [the leaders of the believers, Ali] wanted to be tolerant, he would not have drawn his sword killing 700 people in one go.
In our prisons we have more of the same kind of people who are corrupt. If we do not kill them, each one of them that gets out, will become a murderer! They don’t become humans.
Why do you Mullahs only go after the ordinances of prayer and fasting? Why do you only read the Quranic verses of mercy and do not read the verses of killing?
Quran says; kill, imprison!
Why are you only clinging to the part that talks about mercy? Mercy is against God [allah].
Mehrab [the prayer niche in a mosque, in front of which the imam stands to lead prayers] means the place of war, the place of fighting. Out of the mehrabs, wars should proceed, just as all the wars of Islam used to proceed out of the mehrabs.
[a Khokar: was Khomeini wrong in his interpretation of Islam? Millions of Muslims seemed to think he was a great authority].
The prophet has [had] sword to kill people.
Our [Holy] Imams were quite military men. All of them were warriors. They used to wield swords; they used to kill people. We need a Khalifa [caliph, leader] who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people. In the same way that the messenger of God used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people. In the same way that he massacred the Jews of Bani Qurayza [a Jewish tribe of Medina, massacred by Muhammad] because they were a bunch of discontent[ed] people. If the Prophet used to order to burn a house or exterminate a tribe that was justice.”
Another lovely, spiritual thought from Indian Sufi Sirhindi again, writing in the early 17th century:
“Whenever a Jew is killed, it is for the benefit of Islam”.
The poisonous, murderous, indeed genocidal Jew-hatred of Hamas and Hezbollah, and of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has roots centuries older than the resurgence of the modern Jewish state of Israel on the ancestral Jewish homeland. Hatred of Jews is, in fact, hardwired into the Quran, the Sira and the Hadith.
Now for some historical observations from Robert Spencer’s friend, Hugh Fitzgerald. I fully agree with him.
“The history of Islam, over 1350 years, shows something unique. There is nothing in any other religion like the religiously-prompted and justified mass killing of 60-70 million Hindus in Hindustan by Muslim invaders.
“How much easier to pretend that "everyone is alike," and "everyone does it" and so on. Of course one can be a Christian or Jewish or Buddhist fanatic. But it is a question of frequency, of degree, of likelihood.
“There is something about Islam that many people, over many centuries, have noticed.
"Look at the crazed, hate-filled faces of those all-male Muslim groups shouting for murder in Gaza, or Ramallah when those two Israeli reservists had their eyes gouged out (and that was just the beginning of the fun for the whole crowd assembled below) and then were killed, or those primitive mobs shouting in Pakistan. Are we not to see those faces, nearly demented with hate, day after day, week after week, year after year, and come to no conclusions?
None?”
Jacques Ellul: “There is so much talk nowadays about the tolerance and fundamental pacifism of Islam, that it is necessary to recall its nature, which is FUNDAMENTALLY WARLIKE”.
Your pathetic attempt at tu quoque fools no-one. We do not believe the veil of shimmering lies; we believe the evidence of our senses, and the volumes of historical evidence, the rivers of blood, the mountains of skulls, the recorded deeds of Muslim invaders and oppressors and the words with which they justified, rationalized, gloried in, their invasions and their oppression of non-Muslims.
The two Biblical texts you have picked up from the web (and by the way, perhaps you should check out the Sceptics’ Annotated Koran as well – THAT would blow your mind), do not alter one jot what I have said.
The first item you misquote, from Deuteronomy, was a purely local ordinance, only ever applying within the Jewish community and within the tiny confines of the land of Israel (as was, also, the command to destroy the shrines of the Canaanite religion – it applied only historically, to such as were within the land of Israel).
The Bible does not contain ANY open-ended command to go out and ‘kill the unbelievers wherever you find them’, unto the ends of the earth and the end of time, such as appears in Islam (and cf. this passage from Ibn Ishaq’s life of Mohammed: Ishaq: 204 - “‘Men, do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man [Muhammad]?’ ‘Yes. In swearing allegiance to him we are pledging to wage war against all mankind.’”
There is NOTHING in the Bible even remotely comparable to the open-ended aggression and hostility of Surah 9 of the Quran.
Furthermore, Jews were historically extremely reluctant to impose the death penalty, and demanded very high standards of evidence. The laws are there, yes, but there are few or no records of them being enforced. Modern Israel, of course, does not impose any of the death penalties prescribed in the Torah: no-one gets executed for Sabbath breaking or for adultery or incest.
The rabbis interpreted ‘eye for an eye’ as meaning that punishment or response to an injury should not be disproportionate and excessive; rather than follow it literally, they looked for the underlying principle, that is, moral restraint.
Further: the first (Jewish) followers of Yeshua/ Jesus explicitly chose NOT to require Gentile followers of Yeshua to become culturally ‘Jewish’; that is, we Gentile believers were exempted from all of the ceremonial law [e.g. Sabbath, circumcision, kosher food] while being encouraged to live by the basic principles of the moral law, as summed up by the Rabbis (do not to others what is hurtful to yourself) or by Yeshua himself (do to others as you would they should do to you). The NT NEVER says that those who leave the faith, or who misbehave, should be killed by their fellow Christians.
The saying that ‘he who lives by the sword, shall die by the sword’, is not a command but a proverb, an observation of a common phenomenon, such as we saw when Mughniyeh was assassinated, or while Hamas and Fatah were slugging it out in Gaza. Live by violence; you may well die violently (not always – Chairman Mao killed tens of millions, but died peacefully in his bed, of old age; nevertheless, violent men die violently often enough for ‘live by the sword, die by the sword’ to have a ring of truth).
Finally, your claim that jihad today is due entirely to the Dhimmi Rebellion and the Jews’ reoccupation and liberation of their ancient homeland where some Jews had lived as miserably oppressed Dhimmis all along, is ridiculous.
Jihad went on its merry way for over 1000 years – in India, in SE Asia, in Africa, in the Balkans, in southern Russia – all the while that Jews were terrified, crushed, oppressed and cruelly exploited minorities within the Ummah – hunted, raped, robbed, treated with withering contempt, permitted to stay alive only for what could be got out of them.
If every Jew in the world died tomorrow Jihad would still go on against non-muslims everywhere.
If the USA had had nothing to do with Israel; if the USA had never had any relations, of any kind at all, with any people or regime in the Middle East, but had kept itself to itself; the USA would still be a target of Jihad, because it is big, and rich (a pirate’s dream of plunder) and it is NOT MUSLIM. Just like Byzantium, or Persia, or Sind: it offends Islam, it ‘oppresses’ those delicate, oh so delicate Muslim sensibilities, merely by existing.
And that's the truth.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at February 21, 2008 10:57 PM
Dear dumbledoresarmy,
"Acclaim not your Piety beyond your stretch; look inward; see that your own apparels and garbs are all blotted, blackened and are tattered!"
If I say that six millions Jews were put to death by Adolf Hitler and his cohorts in Europe; (many of the cohorts are still alive); the oppressors happen to be all Christian and US lead forces in Middle East are all Christian who are on their rampage massacring millions of innocents people in Middle East are again all Christian;…to say this will be a mischief and a lie that some how Christianity dictates them to under take such massacres.
I categorically know being a Muslim who has the book; The Glorious Quran which validates and confirms the Christianity for me and also places me at a better place then any of the practicing Christian not to get into such like mischievous absurdities. Like wise Islam with its advanced teachings which confirms as well as supersedes Christianity, Judaic and all old denominations does not support or promote violence, anarchy or mayhem. Islam is all but Peace and also teaches the mankind; how to maintain as well as guard Peace.
---------------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for none
at February 23, 2008 6:02 AM
If a camel farts in the desert and no one is around to smell it does it make an odor?
Posted by: butterfly at February 23, 2008 7:23 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)