“Islam was never a religion of peace. Islam is the religion of fighting,” says the Islamic State’s caliph. Fr. Samir Khalil Samir, the leading Catholic scholar of Islam, says this is “very shrewd,” because it “corresponds to the expectations of a part of the Islamic world,” which will exclaim, “Finally, we find the true Islam!” The caliph’s call, says Fr. Samir, is “meant to rekindle an idea that is deeply embedded in Islam, namely: let us all go through our hijrah, let us leave behind all those who want an Islam of peace, and let us move to the true Islam that conquered Arabia first, then the Middle East, then the Mediterranean.”
All that is below, and in another interview, Fr. Samir says this about the Islamic State (ISIS): “We hear, very often, Muslims say: ‘This has nothing to do with Islam.’ This is a spontaneous reaction of Muslims on the street. But, in fact, it’s a false reaction. This is a part of Islam, and we can find it in the Quran itself and much more in the life of Mohammed, who had a very strong and violent attitude toward unbelievers.”
Here below, Fr. Samir says: “The only solution is a radical reform to the internal reading of Islamic history. When al-Baghdadi says that ‘Islam was never a religion of peace,’ he is exaggerating. Islam also had periods of peace. To say that Islam is only war is also a mistake. Islam is both war and peace. And it is high time for Muslims to re-examine their history.”
It is true that Islam has had periods of peace, and that this radical reform is necessary. When Fr. Samir points out, however, that what the Islamic State does can be found “in the Quran itself and much more in the life of Mohammed,” he is recognizing that such radical reform is going to be extremely difficult, for if the Islamic State’s activities can be found in and justified by the Qur’an and the example of Muhammad, and the periods of peace correspond to the period before the Hijrah that is then succeeded and superseded by the period of war and conquest, then those peaceful periods will always be followed by periods of war ushered in by Muslims wishing to imitate Muhammad and emulate his Hijrah.
It is very interesting to note that in saying that what the Islamic State does can be found “in the Quran itself and much more in the life of Mohammed,” Fr. Samir is differing sharply from Pope Francis’ statement that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence,” and from the position of the U.S. bishops as well.
“For Al-Baghdadi, Islam is a religion of war, a shrewd message according to Father Samir,” by Samir Khalil Samir, Asia News, May 15, 2015:
Rome (AsiaNews) – The Islamic State (IS) group yesterday released an audio message from its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in which he calls on all Muslims to “emigrate” to the caliphate and carry out jihad, holy war, because “Islam was never a religion of peace” but “is the religion of fighting.”
In the 33-minute audio message, Baghadi [sic] is heard saying, “And we call upon every Muslim in every place to perform hijrah (emigration) to the Islamic State or fight in his land wherever that may be”.
In view of this, “Has the time not come for you to know that there is no might nor honour nor safety nor rights for you except in the shade of the Caliphate?”
“Islam,” he adds, “was never a religion of peace. Islam is the religion of fighting. No one should believe that the war that we are waging is the war of the Islamic State. It is the war of all Muslims, but the Islamic State is spearheading it. It is the war of Muslims against infidels.”
Analysts say that the voice seems to be that of the IS supreme leader. It is clear, assured and, in places, almost melodic, but there is no overwhelming evidence that it is his.
In recent weeks, several media reported that Baghdadi had been severely wounded in a coalition air strike last March. Yesterday’s audio message was the first in at least six months. Transcripts of the audio message were posted online in English, French, Russian, German and Turkish.
Previously, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi had appeared only once in a video, delivering a sermon in the great mosque of Mosul, at the inauguration of the caliphate last June.
What follows are the thoughts of Fr Samir Khalil Samir, a Jesuit scholar of Islam. The former professor at St Joseph University in Beirut is currently pro tempore dean at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s message is very shrewd because it corresponds to the expectations of a part of the Islamic world. Certainly, Salafi groups, which seek to roll back society to the style and practices of Muhammad’s, will be happy about it and will say: Finally, we find the true Islam!
It should be noted that when talking about emigrating (hijrah), Baghdadi was referring to Muhammad’s migration from Makkah to Madinah, what we call “’hegira’”, which marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar world (from 622 AD), i.e. the beginning of the Islamic era.
This migration represents the transition from a peaceful Islam to a bellicose Islam. In Makkah, Muhammad never made war, but seeing that his message was not getting through and that few people bothered to listen to him, and that in fact, his life was at risk, he sent a group of his followers to Ethiopia, a Christian country that was willing to accept him. Instead, he went to Madinah.
There he began to preach and a year later, he began to fight, first against the Makkans, then against the tribes, in order to convert them.
Muhammed won all these wars. Most tribes in Arabia ended up following him. However, they did so because he was a military chief not a religious leader.
Evidence for this lies in the fact that when Muhammad died around 634 AD, many tribes broke away, refusing to fight and pay taxes. As a result of this, the new caliph, Abu Bakr, declared war on them and force them to return to Islam.
They refused, saying that they had made a pact with Muhammad, not with Islam. However, Abu Bakr defeated them and forced them to come back to Islam.
It is interesting that this new “caliph” chose Abu Bakr as his name and that he wants to launch a holy war around the world, to subjugate everyone to Islam.
His call is meant to rekindle an idea that is deeply embedded in Islam, namely: let us all go through our hijrah, let us leave behind all those who want an Islam of peace, and let us move to the true Islam that conquered Arabia first, then the Middle East, then the Mediterranean. This would be the last phase of the prophet’s struggle through his new envoy.
All this is highly symbolic.
Currently, some reports indicate that IS is losing support, that several young men, after arriving in Syria and Iraq to fight, have tried to quit and are now languishing in IS prisons.
Baghdadi’s message then is an attempt to mobilise further Muslims in order to gain the support of more committed young people.
His call will almost certainly shake up Muslim Salafis, whose model is primitive Islam. They take as a model Islam’s first generation, and this will convince many Muslim traditionalists to become Salafis and fight.
Faced with such call to arms, what can be done?
A military fight might be necessary, but it will not be decisive. Military actions will reduce the violence, shed less blood, push back IS, but the movement will continue because it is part of Islam.
The only solution is a radical reform to the internal reading of Islamic history.
When al-Baghdadi says that “Islam was never a religion of peace,” he is exaggerating. Islam also had periods of peace. To say that Islam is only war is also a mistake.
Islam is both war and peace. And it is high time for Muslims to re-examine their history.
It is also important to note that the Islamic war is not comparable to the Crusades: The Crusades were at best a limited war to save Jerusalem and the holy sites; it was not a total holy war inspired by the Gospel.By contrast, war in Islam is always holy if it is made to expand the boundaries of Islam or recover Islamic lands.
arish says
Thanks you Mr Samir Khalil Samir. Our political leaders or other religious leaders even Our Presidents Like MR OBAMA and MR BUSH has lied to masses and misguided 7 billions world population about ISLAM as a peaceful religion or religion of peace .
Today I am out of my ancestors land and living in USA all due to islamic terror. I and many Like me thank you to enlighten the political fools and intellectuals fools who has made all live in dark and respecting Islam due to fear.
Time to fight back this evil culture of Saudis and put this human generation on right path.
99.9 % of the world muslim are converts.
Its time the young and fools should understand they are following a terror culture and its time to leave and find back your roots and live a happy and progressive life.
RonaldB says
“99.9 % of the world muslim are converts.
Its time the young and fools should understand they are following a terror culture and its time to leave.”
I question your statistics about 99.9% of Muslims being converts.
“More than three-quarters (77%) of Muslim Americans say they have always been a Muslim, while 23% say they converted to Islam”
http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/converts-to-islam/
But, what makes you think that the converts would be repelled by knowledge of the terror culture? That may be what attracts them.”
Mirren10 says
”But, what makes you think that the converts would be repelled by knowledge of the terror culture? That may be what attracts them.”
Good point, RonaldB.
Akin to this is the idea, floated by some, that most muslims don’t know what is in the koran or hadith, haven’t read the life of mohammed, and if they only did so, they would be so appalled they would apostasise immediately.
I take leave to doubt that. **Some** may well have such a reaction, but if you ask me, the majority *revel* in it.
Paul says
It is the war of Muslims against infidels….take them at their word
Ilya says
I think he meant the ancestors of 99,9 % of all Muslims living today have converted at some point in history (mostly through compulsion) except for Mohamad’s lineage and his contemporaries.
gravenimage says
Ronald B wrote:
But, what makes you think that the converts would be repelled by knowledge of the terror culture? That may be what attracts them.
………………………..
*Very* true, Ronald. I would imagine that—*especially* post-9/11—that there are very few “reverts” who are unaware of the violence of Islam, and who would be shocked to learn of it.
There are far, far more for whom the savagery of Islam is a specific selling point.
sahani says
All you need is DNA check. 58 islamic nations were once Bhudist ,Chritians or Pegan or Hindu or had own cultures. 1400 yr of rule barbaric rule destroy dallpast history Allunder islamlive infer and afraid total about past.
Barbaric ISlam made them accept islam or be killed 280 million or more killed in last 1400 yrs .
In india DNA check was done from north, south, east and west hardly 0.01 % found with any DNA of Arab .
Arab use converts sisters and daughter to warm their bed but no arab girl ever married a convert.
underbed cat says
After 9/11 President Bush did make a statement something to the effect that Islam is peace and that we are not at war with Islam. Many people said he lied. I think he was misinformed and lied to by the Muslim Brotherhood agents who stood behind him when the statement was made. Agents of deceit, in suits highly educated and used to block the knowledge about Saudi Arabia. The dialogue mislead the President. We had been involved with the middle east in purchasing and developing the oil fields. Although the middle east was often in turmoil especially with Israel, there were language and culture barriers and the unknown ideology to spread Islam thru terror had just been experienced but was denied. The Muslim Brotherhood is still in effect today, and have penetrated the U.S. government in every branch. A very good book to read is “Raising a Jihadi Generation ” by John Guandolo. The Influence and the organizations that have landed in the U.S. to subvert our government, educational system, banking, military, medical is information that all U.S. senators and congressmen should be aware of…to not be misled again.
Michael Copeland says
The duping of Cameron, the duping of Clegg,
The duping of Brown and Blair,
They all trace back in a dead straight track
To the duping of Bush by CAIR.
CAIR was “Using deception to mask intended goals” (The Project)
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/6720-the-duping-of-cameron
cjk says
When I found out about Mohammedanism it took about 6 hours of investigation by me myself and I. Either all of Bush’s advisers were liars or he was a liar. After I realized he lied to me and even if he wasn’t lying at that particular time after 9/11, he had to find out the truth about Mohammedanism at some point and chose to keep quiet. I detest that SOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
underbed cat says
I do not detest President Bush. I grew very tired of hearing those comments. Our current President concerns me greatly…he knows and is operating to create a new country…my concern is about his agenda.
When a President states that “the future does not belong to those who slander( which means tell the truth) the Prophet of Islam”, that goes way beyond being diplomatic to almost a warning…that is dangerous.Well those are my thoughts.
RG says
I sincerely believe that President Bush (#2) wanted to do the right thing by the American people. I think it’s hypocritical for some people to berate and defame him after the fact. He not only destroyed Saddam Hussein’s evil regime, but he also attempted to subsequently instill peace in the Middle East. Some of what he did was a result of following misguided info. but most of what he did kept us out of an even greater conflict than 9/11. Did Bush knowingly lie to the American people? Not the way I see it. Has BHO lied to the American people? YES – every time he opens his mouth!!!
RG says
P.S. Let’s never forget that diplomacy is essentially the ‘way of peace’. If President Bush had blatantly declared islam to be the demonic aberration that it is, he would have brought down the wrath of the whole islamic world on the USA! Did he know how evil the “religion” of islam is? Yeah, probably so, but could he openly say it? NOT ON YOUR LIFE!!!
undercat says
I think serial liars tell the truth one day and then lie then next so as not to be detected. They usually have very good memories. I don’t think President Bush completely grasped the magnitude of what he considered a religion, or had studied the Koran. I am sure he relied on advise that came from the muslim organizations who would contradict any suspicions and would pass it off as violent extremists. Not accepted by the faith, but of course it was jihad. Once the subject was studied and the correct advise came forward he was aware. But then came an election and that message was changed again. If we make to the next election I hope the candiate wil have all the knowledge he needs to know how the enemy operates.
Pere LaChaise says
William,
You do not address a Roman Catholic priest as “Mr.” but rather, “Father”. An Arabic Catholic does not dedicate his life to serving Christ and the Church, especially in hostile moslem-ruled territory to be called merely “Mr.” by the likes of us. If you like, the Arabic form, “Abouna” is also acceptable.
Lia Wissing says
FR. Samir, we appreciate your candour. Will you please try to get an audience with the Pope?
William Lucas Harvey Jr. says
FINALLY, the Islamic State’s caliph. Fr. Samir Khalil Samir, the leading “Catholic ?” scholar of Islam, tells the TRUTH about Islam, and Debunks Islam’s “Religion of Peace”, Taqyyia and Kitman “Grand Deception” Lies, INCLUDING the Muslims often made statements of Islam’s “Appologist” EXCUSES for Islam’s Bloody 7th Century Barbaric Butchery by the Islamic State and ISIS (INCLUDING America’s obvious Pro Islam, Pro Muslim, Anti America, Anti Constitution, Anti Christisn Obama Administration’s Statements): ‘This has nothing to do with Islam.’.
Angemon says
While that certainly is true (although how large this “part of the islamic world” is is up for debate), it’s worth noting that any part of the islamic world who might not want to spread islam by the sword (even if willing to spread it in other fashions) would be hard pressed to find support in islamic orthodoxy. And whatever part of the islamic world who just wants to eat halal food (not necessarily limited to sandwiches, as Ben Affleck put it) and pray five times per day and don’t care about waging war for allah not be cause their foes are too mighty to be taken on but because they simply don’t care certainly don’t have any texts or traditions to back them up.
Not sure if “peace” would be the best way to describe it. I believe that a more accurate explanation for most, if not all, of these periods of peace was that the non-muslims were too strong to be taken on by force. And, of course, the islamic world is a very large stretch of land spanning 1400 years – at times where Europe was at “peace”, chances are that jihad was active in, for example, India or Africa
This is a crucial point that eludes most people, including Bill Clinton and sheik Hussein. Nothing good can come of making decisions based on absolutely false assumptions like those two did. “BJ” Clinton should read a book once in a while, while Obama should read more from sources who do more than just confirm what he already “knew”:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/barackbook.jpg
Michael Copeland says
“a radical reform to the internal reading of Islamic history” is what Fr. Samir recommends. Radical reform is a clear idea, but it is not clear what “the internal reading of Islamic history” entails. It is not a radical reform of Islam, nor can it be.
None may change His words” (Koran 18:27).
“This day I have perfected for you your religion” (5:3).
Giving recognition to periods of peace is a fine idea, but it does not alter how Islam mandates violence towards all other systems of governance.
One thing is quite certain: Islam will not accept reforms suggested by filthy kuffar.
Lilithwept says
Well, I am certainly otbyhe Islamic Scholar Fr. Samir is but I dont think Islam can reform, in the manner Christianity did, to become more tolerant, less restrictive. I believe Islam can and is in the process or reforming back to Mohammed’s Islam. It is becoming far less tolerant, much more restrictive.
It is not possible for Islam to reform to become more tolerant and less restrictive. The hatred of on muslims and the restrictions are either in the Quran or part of Sunnah. And if even a part of either are denied then you are apostate.
Islam’s goal, at all times and all places, is to convert the world to Islam. This has never changed at all. I would not use such a strong word as “peace” to describe any phase of Islam, rather I would say Islam has had periods where active jihad ( and by jihad I mean fighting, either in larger scale war fare or small skirmishes) was inactive, or relatively inactive.
The Peace spoken of by muslims is the supposed peace that will result when every person in the world is converted to Islam..
Lia Wissing says
Read Raymond Ibrahim’s article on ISIS being the reformed islam (Gatestone Institute, I think).
R Cole says
When Muhammad was peaceful – in the ‘no compulsion period’ – this religious vagabond had no more than 100 followers – but when he turned to the way of the sword – ‘the compulsion period’ – his flock numbers exploded.
Muhammad was no Christ – there were no flocks – no multitudes surrounding him – and awaiting his arrival.
This is a man who was married to a child – not the Jesus figure who allowed children to play in his presence.
Muhammad was predator in more ways than one:
“The Biography of the Apostle”, part 4, Ibn Hisham says (page 134):
Then & Now
However this is how the Islamic world was won – yet there are similarities in our own time. Before 911, the London or Madrid bombings how many people gave any real though to Islam. If you traveled to the Islamic world – you’ll find they were thinking about us [liked western cigarettes and US dollars but hated the powerful west was not Islamic] – but we were not thinking about them. In the west a lot of Muslim immigrate families married almost exclusively within their own families – mainly through immigration marriages – so cross cultural contact was limited. But after the violence – now we have a halal KFC, you have talk of sharia law replacing western laws [the opposition of which is popularly labeled as ‘hate’ based xenophobic ‘racism’]. You have ex-Muslim being called the newly coined term Islamophobe – almost mimicking Islam’s apostasy laws. Truth is – as ISIS knows – Muslims could have continued marrying their relatives for the next 1000 years – and little or nothing would have changed in Islam’s trajectory – without the added element of violence.
Doing the Islamic Maths
But before we go calling Islam peaceful again – how many people have been killed in Islamic conquests? Looking to the East – in the old Hindu lands of Afghanistan and the Asian Sub Continent – you could easily arrive at a figure of 150 million dead. And that is not counting the conquest of Persia – which acted as a gateway country to attack the others. Possibly there might be 200 million slaughtered in that region alone. Not included in this number is the Islamic conquest of northern and central Africa and sections of Europe – to the East and up to Russia. And last but not least the conquest and request of the Middle East – taken together would bring the figure of those slaughtered in the name of Islam – to somewhere in the region of 500 million. That’s a half a billion ~ folks!!
Could the reality of Islam be – that for every Muslim alive today – there has been at least one person killed.
And they are still killing ~ those who do what is forbidden! [Koran 9:29]
::
The peaceful periods in Islam’s history – are when respect for humanity is predominant – where people as many moderates do today – would identify Islam with their humanity – versus the hostile violent periods when Islam – which is held as the superior model – under which people are encouraged to act in defiance of their humanity – holds greater sway.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
… but when he turned to the way of the sword – ‘the compulsion period’ – his flock numbers exploded.
Maybe that had to do with the sudden availability of wealth in the form of cash, land and women slaves. The so-called Companions grew in number overnight when that happened. Prophet Mohammed was a genius, even though he never did prophesy anything. His genius was that he realized that people would respond to free money, free land and free sex. Works every time.
Lilithwept says
But the wealth, lands and women for wives and sex slaves were NOT free.
They were fought for, sometimes raiding a trading caravan othertimes waging war for no reason ( except he wanted their possesions and hated them for not acknowledging him as a prophet) ) on the Jews.
Mohammed gave a firey sermon to the ” hypocrits ” who , when it was time to fight, would come to Mohammed with every excuse that could think of. Mohammed accepted the excuses atvthe time then after the fighting cursed the hypocrits saying they were no real muslims, that Allah cursed them, that they would end up in hellfire.
I use that example of the hypocrits and what Mohammed said to and about them when people say ” oh there are peaceful, moderate muslims. I know some.” I tell people who say this that ISIS is following exactly what Mohammed did, Sunnah and what is in the Quran. (Its all right there in the Quran and Hadiths) That is Pure Islam. The other muslims are NOT following their religion fully. That Mohammed himself was angry and cursed people who would not fight in Allah’s cause! That they gave all sorts of excuses, just as so called moderate, peaceful Muslims do, but in Pure Islam, they are cursed hypocrits destined for hellfire.
But, i do agree the ” stick” of threatning muslims with hellfire if they didnt fight and the “carrot” of wealth, land, women was an exellent inducement to fight. And dont for get the brothel of Paradise!!!! 72 ever renewing large eyed virgins with swelling breasts, young boy servants as beautiful and pure as pearls ( if you swing that way) rivers of milk, the purest of water, honey and the wine you were denied in life, that doesnt intoxicate, any sort of meat desired, cooked with rare spices and served on beautiful platters and luscious fruits hanging from trees almost dropping into your hands.
And if you were killed in battle, you got on the fast track to this Paradise!!! A Win-Win situation, live and get booty, die and get Paradise. So not quite Free but well worth the price………..if Mohammed was right about Paradise.
This was carefully crafted to appeal to people, wheather they lived in villiages or roamed the desert. All the things of Islams Paradise would be what people of the desert craved, what was scarce And difficult to find and what was expensive, if you could find it.
spot on says
…free money, free land and free sex. Works every time.
Alarmed, I agree, this works every time. Sounds similar to our welfare party’s ideas and maybe helps explain why liberals are “Birds of a feather” with Muslims.
IQ al Rassooli says
Fr Samir is being TOO kind to Muslims. The ONLY periods when Muslims were NOT at war with non Muslims were during times when Muslims were slaughtering each others’ sects or when the Amir (leader) was NOT Sharia compliant otherwise Islam CANNOT ever be at PEACE with Kuffar/ Infidels because as a Baghdadi (who is not only an Imam but also a scholar of Islam) TRUTHFULLY explained (with numerous references from Muhammad’s Quran) : Islam is a religion of WAR
Islam was conceived by the shedding of a SEA of blood slaughtering Pagan, Christian & Judaized Arabs in the Arabian Peninsula (starting 622 AD) followed by the shedding of OCEANS of blood on three continents and continues as we speak today
Anyone declaring Islam as a religion of peace should be assigned to a mental institution including Obama!
It is with excruciating slowness that people around the world are waking up to the Facts & Reality of Islam’s & Muslims’ existential threat to ALL of non Muslim humanity (currently 80% of humanity)
The virus of Muhammad’s Quran is so virulent that it INSTANTLY eradicates the areas dealing with Logic, Compassion & Mercy in the brain of the victim or convert turning it into a ZOMBIE irrational killing machine
IQ al Rassooli
Kafir & Proud!
cs says
surah 9-5, 9-29, 9-111.
Bill says
Thanks for the insightful and accurate comment. The Jesuit priest’s comments are accurate and helpful until he threw in the possibility of Islam reforming and becoming civil, tolerant and non-violent. Tha t is part of the typical line of illogic and dissembling that makes us vulnerable.
profitsbeard says
Islam is a Death Cult. (You try to leave, they try to kill you.)
It only survives by the threat of The Sword.
Mohammad did not convert people by an appeal to love or wisdom, but under pain of death.
The Koran is a playbook of terror.
The sooner this malignant ideology vanishes from the planet and is left an archaeological curio for scholars (to shake their heads over in horror) the better.
somehistory says
As for the *reforming of islam*…everyone should read what Raymond Ibrahim wrote on that very topic. It is an eye-opener. The *reform* of islam is nothing like what many, perhaps most, people would expect to happen.
TH says
Fr. Samir actually did an analysis of what pope Francis has to say on Islam in his programatic document called in Latin Evengelii Gaudium (The joy of the Gospel) and he points on where it is not correct, diplomatically of course.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Part partially explained, as in not explained at all, which makes it whole
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s message is very shrewd because it corresponds to the expectations of a part of the Islamic world.
At least the apologists have quit calling it a tiny minority. But, how small of a part, and what part? Maybe the part is defined by the Holy Ko-Ran and the Hah-Deaths. Troubled by this question, I just went back and looked at these documents, now the most important texts in the world, and it turns out that the part amounts to 100%. Is it possible for a totality to be a part?
For some reason, the Father did not address this question; he did not look it up. If the Holy See declines to invoke Islamic scripture, maybe the Catholic Church should cease from invoking the Bible too. Just to be equatable.
celtic warriarcanada says
As Raymond Ibrahim has so well explained,”There is already a REFORMATION in ISLAM and it’s called ISIS ! “
Champ says
Here below, Fr. Samir says: “The only solution is a radical reform to the internal reading of Islamic history.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
As a Christian, I know that this will NEVER happen; in fact, things are going to get much worse before Jesus Christs *returns* to set up His earthly kingdom for one thousand years at His second coming …
Question: “What is the Second Coming of Jesus Christ?”
Answer: http://www.gotquestions.org/second-coming-Jesus-Christ.html
David says
He’s already returned and is summoning all mankind to His Shelter.
All religions not only Christianity including Buddhism and Islam foretell a time when a Promised Messenger, Teacher, Buddha, Christ will appear again. He has appeared and His Name, the New Name promised in Revelation is Baha’u’llah. Muhammad also was foretold in the Bible. References to Mount Paran and the Paraclete are all references the the Revelation of Muhammad.
Those here and elsewhere condemning Muhammad and the Quran are in reality condemning the Holy Bible as well and Christ because Christ Himself prophesied Muhamnad. We should accept everything Christ taught and He taught His followers to accept Muhammad. Those who turn against Muhamnad turn against Christ also.
Even Islam had a time which has ended and a new Revelation has appeared.
The creative Word of God has again been uttered but this time written down also.
The Bible foretold the Coming of Muhammad as did the Zoroastian scriptures Christ when the 3 Magi, Zoroastrian Kimgs known as the 3 wise men travelled to Bethlehem to give praise to Christ being born. The Hindu scriptures talk about the return of Krishna.
People here such as you and Robert Spencer really think they’re doing their own thing when you are all doing nothing but obeying the command of Baha’u’llah over a century ago to abolish Jihad. Once the Word of God speaks or is uttered the means come about for its implication.
Baha’u’llah said, before world travel and inter communications had even been thought of ‘The world is but one country and mankind it’s citizens’. Lo and behold the Internet, air travel and intercommunicatins all suddenly appear which have not appeared before Baha’u’llah’s pronouncement.
His pronouncement too that Jihad has been abolished has given rise to the opposition of Jihad and establishment of sites like this that vehemently oppose Jihad.
O people of the earth!
The first Glad-Tidings which the Mother Book hath, in this Most Great Revelation, imparted unto all the peoples of the world is that the law of holy war hath been blotted out from the Book. Glorified be the All-Merciful, the Lord of grace abounding, through Whom the door of heavenly bounty hath been flung open in the face of all that are in heaven and on earth.
In former religions such ordinances as holy war, destruction of books, the ban on association and companionship with other peoples or on reading certain books had been laid down and affirmed according to the exigencies of the time; however, in this mighty Revelation, in this momentous Announcement, the manifold bestowals and favours of God have overshadowed all men, and from the horizon of the Will of the Ever-Abiding Lord, His infallible decree hath prescribed that which We have set forth above.
Before Robert Spencer’s ancestors were born Baha’u’llah abolished Jihad. All Robert Spencer is really doing is hastening the day when Jihad will be no more as it has been abolished by God in this age. He is obeying the Lord’s decree to a certain degree.
We will see world peace and world unity as these have been announced for this age. So too the equality of men and women. Baha’u’llah wrote about the equality of men and women before Germaine Greer and her like ever were born.
The spirit of this age is Baha’i go and seek out the Baha’i Teachings and see just how the world is leaning in that direction despite opposition from fanatics who want to take us back to the Stone Age so to speak. It will never happen.
Baha’u’llah addressed a Tablet to the Christians if you look for it and it is a direct Tablet announcing to Christians the return of Christ ‘in the glory of the Father.
Christ was the Son. Baha’u’llah is the Father and the Great Announcement promised in the Quran.
Lia Wissing says
In the OT muslims use Deuteronomy 18: 18 and in the NT they point to John 14: 16. Neither, of course, points to mohammad.
duh_swami says
David…A really long bunch of claptrap. Who cares about your long winded sermons?
Salome says
I like Fr Samir. He tends to say things that go against the grain of the non-Middle-Eastern Roman hierarchy. Nevertheless, I understand that Islam’s periods of peace occurred either when it was at so much of a disadvantage in terms of military strength that it had no choice, or else at times when it had conquered so much Lebensraum that it could spread out and be comfortable, and that within said Lebensraum any infidel allowed to live did so under conditions of oppressive dhimmitude. That, in my book, isn’t peace.
Salome says
And another thing: as long as the West does the right thing by the Christians, Jews and other minorities, I’m quite happy for as many Muslim thugs as possible to make hijrah to the Caliph’s Lebensraum.
Lilkthwept says
The problem is if we allow ISIS to grow, in numbers, wealth and land it then becomes a major threat to the West militarily not just with them possible sending terrorists to attack us.
Even if ISIS was completely broken by the Military, some people will live. And as long as Islam exists, and those survivors of ISIS live, there will be a threat to the West and Islam will be patient while kt is weak and attempt to grow when its stronger. That is historically what it has done as well as being a technique thats in the Quran.
duh_swami says
the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence,”
Exactly what is ‘the proper reading’? What makes it ‘proper’?
I was told by a Quran only doctor(?) That only the Arabic is correct because of numerous translation errors. He thought the translators, Yusuf Ali, Pickthal, and the rest did not understand Arabic well enough. When I pointed out that if that is correct, my English translation was incomplete, wrong, and misleading.. He agreed and said I should take that evil translation to a mosque and turn it over to the Imam, that he would know what to do. When I asked him what verse 5:33 really meant in Arabic, he didn’t answer.
Plamen says
Baghdadi’s full speech:
http://brendanslongblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/islamic-state-leader-al-baghdadis.html
Mark says
quote – We hear, very often, Muslims say: ‘This has nothing to do with Islam.’ This is a spontaneous reaction of Muslims on the street. But, in fact, it’s a false reaction. This is a part of Islam, and we can find it in the Quran itself and much more in the life of Mohammed, who had a very strong and violent attitude toward unbelievers.”
Am increasingly surprised how many claimed as scholars are unable to ascertain when its muslims talking with ignorance or as it is in allmost every situation as I have found (over 15 years) muslims doing their warfare lying, al taqiyya.