Islamic scholars Reza Aslan (a professor of creative writing at the University of California, Riverside) and Mia Bloom (a professor of security studies at the University of Massachusetts-Lowell) are rudely contemptuous of anyone who would dare question their knowledge of Islam, but both have just made the same spectacular error — the kind of error that only someone with no actual knowledge of the relevant material would ever have made.
As you can see, both just tweeted out the same thing: a quote from the first caliph, Abu Bakr, that they think establishes that the Islamic State is violating Islamic law. The only problem is that the document cited as the source for this statement actually endorses the killing of non-Muslims who refuse to convert to Islam, as well as of apostates from Islam, and the taking captive of their women and children.
David Wood has the story at Answering Muslims:
Here are some portions of a lengthy letter Abu Bakr sent (along with an army) to the apostates and rebels. Unlike Aslan, I’ll actually document the source so that people can take a closer look if they like.
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. From Abu Bakr, caliph of the Apostle of God, to whomever this letter of mine may reach among the commoners and notables who has stood fast in his Islam or who has turned back from it: Peace upon those who follow the [true] guidance and who have not turned back to error and blindness after [having received] the [true] guidance. Verily I praise to you God, other than Whom there is no god. I bear witness that there is no god but God alone, Who has no associate, and that Muhammad is His Servant and His Apostle; we affirm that which he brought, and that which he denied we declare to be unbelief and strive against it. Now then: Verily God, may He be exalted, sent Muhammad with His truth to His creation as a bearer of good tidings and as a warner and as one calling [others] to God, with His permission, and as a light-bringing lamp, so that he might warn [all] who live, and so that the saying against the unbelievers might be fulfilled. So God guided with the truth whoever responded to Him, and the Apostle of God, with His permission, struck whoever turned his back to Him until he came to Islam, willingly or grudgingly. Then God took His Apostle to Him, he having carried out God’s command . . .
I have learned that some of you have turned back from your religion after you had acknowledged Islam and labored in it, out of negligence of God and ignorance of His command, and in compliance with the devil. . . . I have sent to you someone at the head of an army of the Muhajirun and the Ansar and those who follow [them] in good works. I ordered him not to fight anyone or to kill anyone until he has called him to the cause of God; so that those who respond to him and acknowledge [Him] and renounce [unbelief] and do good works, [my envoy] shall accept him and help him to [do right], but I have ordered him to fight those who deny [Him] for that reason. So he will not spare any one of them he can gain mastery over, [but may] burn them with fire, slaughter them by any means, and take women and children captive; nor shall he accept from anyone anything except Islam. So whoever follows him, it is better for him; but whoever leaves him, will not weaken God. . . . (The History of al-Tabari, Volume X, State University of New York Press, 1993, pp. 55-57)
Here are five takeaways from the underlined portions:
(1) According to Abu Bakr, Muhammad “struck whoever turned his back to” Allah “until he came to Islam, willingly or grudgingly.” Does Aslan agree with Abu Bakr that Muhammad compelled people to convert to Islam, whether they wanted to become Muslims or not?
(2) Abu Bakr sends the letter with an army, and the army is instructed “not to fight anyone or to kill anyone until he has called him to the cause of God.” Those who returned to Islam were to be left alone, while those who refused to return to Islam were to be fought.
(3) Khalid bin al-Walid (the commander of the army) was ordered not to “spare any one of them he can gain mastery over.”
(4) The penalties for refusing to submit to Islam included “burning them with fire” and “slaughtering them by any means.”
(5) Women and children were to be taken captive.
As you can see, the Islamic State is following Abu Bakr’s guidelines to the letter. Yet Reza Aslan invites Islamic State jihadists to follow Abu Bakr’s guidelines. By telling jihadists to obey Abu Bakr, Aslan is telling them to (1) invite people to Islam, (2) slaughter those who refuse to submit, and (3) take women and children captive.
Thus by calling on the Islamic State to follow Abu Bakr’s rules of war, Aslan and Bloom are unwittingly recommending the killing of apostates, jihad murder of non-Muslims, and the taking captive of women and children.
These “scholars” need not worry, however. Academia and the mainstream media are both one-party states. They can be secure in the knowledge that they will never be challenged on their egregious ignorance of a field in which they have claimed expertise. They have the requisite politically acceptable opinions, and that is all that matters.


Jay Boo says
Don’t be fooled by that attempt at a smile seen in the photo.
This guy is not as friendly as he seems.
G179 says
Dear Professor Bloom,
Let me make sure I understand:
Beheading Jews and Christians is just fine, as long as they are between the age of 7 and 77, and no tree is harmed in the process?
Yours sincerely,
A confused student.
Beagle says
I saw this yesterday. David Wood is one of my new heroes. I watch at least a video a week to catch up.
I loved Wood’s comment about Aslan’s reply: “His reply was to block my comment.”
Shut up, he explained.
jihad3tracker says
David Wood is a brilliantly factual counter-jihad asset, with a superb sense of humor.
Self-described as a former atheist, now convert to Christianity. His meticulous rebuttal to and exposure of lies by Muslims are worthy of doctoral thesis research.
I treasure him equally with Spencer, Geller, and the anonymous tireless bloggers at http://www.barenakedislam.com / http://www.thereligionofpeace / http://www.inquiryintoislam / http://www.citizenwarrior.com.
rev g says
Such expertise at cherry-picking phrases that sound promising, without the full context exposed so as to reveal the truth.
I imagine there is some degree of skill involved in doing that. They are not alone in this practice, it seems they have a plethora of willing accomplices for duping the public about islam.
Boston Tea Party says
This becomes a familiar pattern once you’ve begun to investigate Islam. You find that it’s the defenders of Islam who cherry-pick quotations and take them out of context, and it’s the horrible, Islamophobic meanies like Robert Spencer who actually present the quotations in full and within their actual historical context.
Boston Tea Party says
Oops–credit to David Wood, as well.
Crixus says
I have no interest in what some caliph who lived 1000 years ago has to say. It has no relevance to the modern world of the enlightenment we have fought so hard to build over the last 500 years.
There is no point in debating ‘scripture’ with a zealot, the very fact that they give divine status to words on a page, written by a man a long time ago precludes their ability to reason analytically.
Never get involved in an argument with an idiot, he’l’ drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
awake says
Only a Muslim or Islam apologist, who is hell-bent on occupational suicide, would ever quote the doctrine of Islam in context.
Champ says
From “Answering Muslims”, David Wood’s video ===> “Top Ten Quran Verses For Understanding ISIS” is spectacular! No doubt about it, ISIS *is* islam.
Tradewinds says
Incredible post-9/11 we are tolerating this islam balderdash. They should all be sent packing back to their crapistans with their qurans and mosks, too.
zichronot says
Putting lipstick on a pig,is only making us laugh.Islam IS what it IS.
Tim Lister says
This is an excerpt from a letter by Stephen, Count of Blois and Chartres, to his wife during the Crusades. Does the tone sound familiar?
“You have certainly heard that after the capture of the city of Nicaea we fought a great battle with the perfidious Turks and by God’s aid conquered them. Next we conquered for the Lord all Romania and afterwards Cappadocia. And we learned that there was a certain Turkish prince Assam, dwelling in Cappadocia; thither we directed our course. All his castles we conquered by force and compelled him to flee to a certain very strong castle situated on a high rock. We also gave the land of that Assam to one of our chiefs and in order that he might conquer the above-mentioned Assam, we left there with him many soldiers of Christ. Thence, continually following the wicked Turks, we drove them through the midst of Armenia, as far as the great river Buphrates. Having left all their baggage and beasts of burden on the bank, they fled across the river into Arabia.
The bolder of the Turkish soldiers, indeed, entering Syria, hastened by forced marches night and day, in order to be able to enter the royal city of Antioch before our approach. The whole army of God learning this gave due praise and thanks to the omnipotent Lord. Hastening with great joy to the aforesaid chief city of Antioch, we besieged it and very often had many conflicts there with the Turks; and seven times with the citizens of Antioch and with the innumerable troops coming to its aid, whom we rushed to meet, we fought with the fiercest courage, under the leadership of Christ. And in all these seven battles by the aid of the Lord God, we conquered and most assuredly killed an innumerable host of them. In those battles, indeed, and in very many attacks made upon the city, many of our brethren and followers were killed and their souls were borne to the joys of paradise.”
The Infidel says
Hello Tim Lister,
I notice in there that there is no quotes from the Bible? If they have been taken out, would you be so kind as to produce them, otherwise you argument is invalid. Due to the fact that IS can in fact quote the Koran for what they are doing.
As you can plainly see, the crusaders did not quote scripture, whereas IS does.
The crusaders were trying as hard as they could to defend their homelands from the invading islamists, IS is doing the invading. This makes a huge difference to all but those determined to create a moral equivalence.
Hope this helps you understand the difference.
rev g says
Why don’t we just compare the Crusades’ aggression against muslim aggression from that era? Someone else already had done it for us.
http://counterjihadreport.com/2014/08/20/new-bill-warner-video-jihad-vs-crusades/
GP says
So, what are you saying Haji?
nacazo says
Azzlan is a paid iranian lobbyist.
Azzlan is a liar on purpose. Making islam look better, peddle moral relativism such that any ideology is good as long as it makes you feel good, weakening America and making sure Iran’s ayatollas interests are protected. Defensor of evil causes. Saying that good is bad and bad is good.
paddy says
Fuck religiosity! why can’t you people just realise that the whole concept of god is a total scam. Life is what YOU make it and there is NOTHING beyond that (trust me..i’m an atheist). Life is about the here and now. Fuck death and the prospect of immortality…it aint happening.
Tradewinds says
Can you just stop spewing your atheism? Many of us here are Christians and Jews so take your foul-mouthed “fuck religiosity” elsewhere.
In addition, it’s only the Arabian moon god Allah that’s the problem. Judaism and Christianity are NOT the problem.
Furthermore – you’re an atheist? No, I don’t trust you at all. You don’t know nuthin’. This is not the forum for your atheism.
rev g says
Why would I trust an atheist? They have no source of morality compelling them to honesty, much like muslims when dealing with infidels.
Tradewinds says
rev – Just want to say I’ve admired you and your posts. I esp enjoyed your standing up to the foul-mouthed abuser jihadski. Thanks for doing that. You have no idea how many were cheering you on.
rev g says
Thanks, it seems most of us here bring some insight to the table, even the detractors, so we all end up better informed as a result.
I have no malice towards PJ, we all have our moments, the sooner we get past them and back on topic, the better.
Champ says
Thanks, it seems most of us here bring some insight to the table, even the detractors, so we all end up better informed as a result.
I have no malice towards PJ, we all have our moments, the sooner we get past them and back on topic, the better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You’re a good man, Rev G …and I apologize for getting cross with you the other day. Please forgive me.
GP says
paddy
I am certain there are flaming atheist sites out there that would love your insight and rants. However, if you post here you may want to get back on your meds first. just sayin.
Biff H says
What a Card.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126142123@N07/15361850839/in/photostream/lightbox/
Jeff says
Saw an interview on Huffpo a couple days ago where Aslan claimed that Mohammad abolished slavery.
Uncle Vladdi says
Re: “They can be secure in the knowledge that they will never be challenged on their egregious ignorance of a field in which they have claimed expertise. They have the requisite politically acceptable opinions, and that is all that matters.”
Yep – that sums up all those “academic” credentialist idolaters in general!
Each asserts that, just because they paid people who said they were smart, to say they were smart, too, that it somehow really means they are smart!
😉
Champ says
Doglick wrote:
@Champ
Good comment. Thank you for making a fine point without quoting from your own particular myth-system.
Regards
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you for the degrading, backhanded compliment ..wow you’re mean. You got myth much?
Well, in spite of your mean attitude, I do hope that you have a nice day! 🙂