Joseph Lumbard is “Assistant Professor of Arabic and Translation Studies, American University of Sharjah” in the UAE; apparently he has left Brandeis, where he was in 2014 when he promised to “dominate” me in debate, and then ran away. A convert to Islam, he is an editor of the cynical and deceptive new Study Quran that has been hailed as the true “moderate” version of the Muslim book.
This piece is just as cynical and deceptive. This pseudo-academic charlatan and deceiver spends many windy paragraphs explaining that the Qur’an has context that jihadis ignore, and then proceeds to ignore it himself. In attempting to explain away Qur’an 9:5, “slay the idolaters wherever you find them,” he makes no mention what classic and mainstream Qur’an commentators say about the verse: Ibn Juzayy notes that v. 5 abrogates “every peace treaty in the Qur’an,” and specifically abrogates the Qur’an’s directive to “set free or ransom” captive unbelievers (47:4). According to As-Suyuti, “This is an Ayat of the Sword which abrogates pardon, truce and overlooking” — that is, perhaps the overlooking of the pagans’ offenses. The Tafsir al-Jalalayn says that the Muslims must “slay the idolaters wherever you find them, be it during a lawful [period] or a sacred [one], and take them, captive, and confine them, to castles and forts, until they have no choice except death or Islam.”
Ibn Kathir echoes this, directing that Muslims should “not wait until you find them. Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them. This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam.” He also doesn’t seem to subscribe to the view commonly put forward by Muslim spokesmen in the West today — that this verse applies only to the pagans of Arabia in Muhammad’s time, and has no further application. He asserts, on the contrary, that “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” means just that: the unbelievers must be killed “on the earth in general, except for the Sacred Area” — that is, the sacred mosque in Mecca, in accord with Qur’an 2:191.
If the unbelievers convert to Islam, the Muslims must stop killing them. The Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “But if they repent, of unbelief, and establish prayer and pay the alms, then leave their way free, and do not interfere with them.” Ibn Kathir: “These Ayat [verses] allowed fighting people unless, and until, they embrace Islam and implement its rulings and obligations.” Qutb says that the termination of the treaties with a four-month grace period, combined with the call to kill the unbelievers, “was not meant as a campaign of vengeance or extermination, but rather as a warning which provided a motive for them to accept Islam.”
Finally, it is noteworthy that, according to As-Suyuti, the jurist Ash-Shafi’i took this as a proof for killing anyone who abandons the prayer and fighting anyone who refuses to pay zakat [alms]. “Some use it as a proof that they are kafirun [unbelievers].” Likewise Ibn Kathir: “Abu Bakr As-Siddiq used this and other honorable Ayat as proof for fighting those who refrained from paying the Zakah.” Thus even Muslims who do not fulfill Islamic obligations fall into the category of those who must be fought. This is a principle that latter-day Salafist movements apply broadly and use frequently in branding governments that do not rule according to strict Islamic law as unbelievers who must be fought by those who regard themselves as true Muslims. This is playing out now in the Islamic State’s declaration that those Muslims who do not accept its authority are unbelievers and can therefore lawfully be killed.
Joseph Lumbard won’t tell you any of this. He would prefer you believe that the Qur’an teaches peace, and that jihadis are misunderstanding it on a massive global scale. If that were true, can Lumbard explain why Muslim clerics have so signally failed to teach the true, peaceful Islam to their people?
“Understanding the Relationship Between the Quran and Extremism,” by Joseph E. B. Lumbard, Huffington Post, March 23, 2016:
…Muslim scholars have always been aware that texts have historical contexts and must be understood in accordance with them. One of the central tools for Quranic interpretation is the “occasions of revelation.” These reports outline the particular historical circumstances in which passages of the Quran were first articulated. They are essential for interpretation and are employed in all major Quran commentaries. In one instance, Ali ibn Abi Talib told a man that if he did not know the “occasions of revelation,” or historical contexts, he should not comment on the Quran.
The “occasions of revelation” guide interpreters in determining which verses have broad application and which are more limited in scope. They restrict the application of several Quranic verses to particular historical circumstances. The most famous instance of such contextual limitation is perhaps Quran 9:5, known as “The Sword Verse”:
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wheresoever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer and give the alms, then let them go their way.
The majority of Muslim scholars maintain that the phrase “slay the idolaters wheresoever you find them” refers to particular tribes that had declared open warfare on the Muslims during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad. Awareness of this historical circumstance contains and restrains the interpretation of the verse, thus preventing the wanton and unwarranted applications that those with political ambitions and apocalyptic visions seek today. As Qadi Abu Bakr, one of the most influential commentators in Islamic history writes, “It is clear that the intended meaning of the verse is to slay those idolaters who are waging war against you.” Heeding the call to fight issued in Quran 9:5 is thus conditional upon there being an existing state of aggression. If, however, one casts aside historical context and interpretive tradition, passages such as 9:5 are employed by strident ideologues to advocate a state of perpetual warfare….

quotha raven says
Deus ex machine, much?
Cheers!
quotha raven
quotha raven says
make that “machina” sorry. qr
mortimer says
Does Allah mean what he says? Or is Allah OFF HIS MEDS? Or is Allah simply the WORST COMMUNICATOR ever? His statements and commands always come out sounding like the DIRECT OPPOSITE of what he ACTUALLY wanted to say. Muslims spend most of their time explain that Allah didn’t say what he said. (Muslims think Allah is a confusing speaker too.)
Please watch the following. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/02/is-allah-the-worst-communicator-ever#comments
David Wood demonstrates how Muslims DON’T TRUST ALLAH’s words in the Koran because they constantly reinterpret and rephrase them, then Muslims tell us Allah is not saying what he PLAINLY SAID. Is Allah the worst communicator ever?
In the Western world, Islamic apologists spend most of their time explaining why Allah’s violent hate language cannot be taken seriously. Allah does not really mean it. Yet, if Muslims do not believe that the words of Allah are ‘clear’ (and therefore literally true), why should we care what Allah says? Allah claims he is ‘clear’ in the Koran, but Muslims claim Allah’s words are opaque even to Muslims.
The Koran does not set a time limit on most of Allah’s violent commands…they are open-ended. Why does the Koran say it is ‘clear’ when Muslim apologists say it is not?
Allah’s words are so ‘unclear’, in fact, that they cannot be understood literally or without special training requiring many years of studying clever rationalizations that seek to explain why Allah and his supreme messenger contradict themselves and Allah’s Hebrew prophets hundreds of times.
Our logical conclusion is that Allah is the worst communicator ever because he is unable to say what he means. When Allah says ‘Kill the disbelievers WHEREVER you find them’, he doesn’t mean it.
Allah really meant to say that Muslims should support the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Sure.
underbed cat says
Funny…crazy and true. Still laughing. Great line “why should they (muslims) care what Allah says..”
Wouldn’t that be nice.
Keys says
Maybe Mohammad was upset and did not communicate well Allah.
Allah reminds me of Jake from State Farm (USA tv commercial).
Mohammad in cave: You can do that for me?
Infidel Wife: Who are you talking to at 4:00 in the morning?
Mohammed: Ah, it’s Allah from Hate/Harm
Infidel Wife looking up angrily: Who is this?
Allah: Allah from Hate/Harm.
Infidel Wife: Well, what are you wearing, Allah from Hate/Harm?!
Allah: Ah, Kafirs.
Infidel Wife to Mohammed: She sounds hideous!
Mohammed: Well she’s a god, so …..
underbed cat says
Hey,I have said it many times. to hubby, who are you talking to at 4 am in the morning…anyway…funny. Nice to laugh sometimes thru the tears.
Is the Koran a good book, just read it you’ll find out…….or read JW.
Susan B says
Can’t stop laughing that is so funny.
revereridesagain says
“…at climbing its way out of a swimming pool up a blackboard…” — oh thank you Mortimer, I just love David Wood! He’s the Terry Pratchett of Christian criticism of Islam, and I do mean that as the highest compliment!
Demsci says
Very good post, Mortimer! You have such a good way with words! It is my hope that that video of the genius communicator David Wood becomes widespread knowledge!
And still the Huffington post, and a majority of Westerners either don’t investigate or understand Islam! And when they try to, they (ony) turn to lying, obfuscating Apologists.
We here can all agree that it is good to investigate and understand Islam, and that once a Western Democratic Citizen has done that well, he/ she should conclude that Islam is very dangerous.
But I humbly put it to you that we now have heard two rather opposing assertions from you; This one, which to us makes it clear, that the source-texts of Islam are NOT CLEAR, BUT messy, contradictive, ambiguous, very hard for apologists, or Allah, to communicate well to an ordinary audience.
The apologists try to do so, and they try to do so without all these Tafsir, Islamic Schools of Thought, and their efforts are laughable, as David, and YOU show.
But your other assertion, and then you do use the Tafsir, schools of thought, Al Azhar, the reliance of the traveler, is that Islam IS CLEAR and can’t be reformed, and that all talk of possible hopeful reform is futile and that in effect ALL Muslims, when serious about their religion, are potentially dangerous enemies.
But the real deception, taqqiya also pushed forward by this Joseph Lumbard, is the implicit assertion that Islam is clear, with only one true version, that then becomes “whitewashed”.
And here you contradict that, but at the same time you also contradict yourself. As you earlier seem to say; Islam is clear, with only one true version, that is demonstrably very supremacist, hostile, violent and dangerous.
The subtle distinction I like to make is; Islam is dangerous precisely because Allah is such a bad communicator! In core-texts! Without Tafsir!
Which makes Islam such a muddle, that it would be laughable, if not so many millions of Muslims derive a detrimental interpretation from it.
Keys says
If Mohammad only knew that the immutable word of Allah did not really mean to slay the unbelievers, then Muslims would not have to follow the model man’s murderous example.
Jay Boo says
The satanic verse quoting Muhammad knew that the immutable word of Allah was changeable as needed allowing earlier peaceful verses to become “abrorgated”.
Muhammad “abrorgated” the meaning of the word (immutable).
Jay Boo says
ALLAH said so
Muhammad promised his wives that he would stop having sex with his sex slaves.
But, the lecherous apostle of Allah did it anyway.
As coincidence would have it, Allah had scolded Muhammad just in the nick of time for making such a promise and insisted that Muhammad continue commencing with his pig pimp prophet-hood.
underbed cat says
“When the Koran says” kill them “, it doesn’t mean it.”…..so someone better get the eraser out…it also says peace and justice and it doesn’t mean that also, or that muslims don’t believe in suicide…but martyrs are Ok…..freedom of speech, nope that is slander……but what can you expect…he is taking the blue pill and it comes with a pension and a hosting community.
jihad3tracker says
WHEN YOU HAVE A FEW SPARE MINUTES, GET IN TOUCH WITH THIS PUSSY (APOLOGY FOR ALL CATS WHOM I HAVE JUST INSULTED).
Remind him of Robert’s post here, and of Lumbard’s juvenile promise to “dominate” him, before he fled the United States. There probably is a path to email him — but be sure to disguise the subject line of your remarks so he will actually open them.
Mirren10 says
Here you go, jihad3tracker.
jlumbard@aus.edu
Have fun ! 🙂
jihad3tracker says
THANK YOU, MIRREN 10 — SORRY FOR THE LATE REPLY.
Mirren10 says
You’re welcome. I sent this creepazoid a link to the David Wood video; ”is allah the worst communicator”, with an innocent request for him to explain, as I was so confused. 🙂
No reply, of course !
Mirren10 says
Golly ! He actually replied !
”I find the koran very confusing”
If you have a specific question, please feel free to ask it. Sending videos by polemicists really is not worth anybody’s time. If you want to send videos back and forth, here is one that I recommend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifllgTA2pmY
—– Original Message —–
To: jlumbard@aus.edu
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 1:16:16 AM
Subject: I find the koran very confusing.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEKhq8nHbA8
Perhaps you could enlighten me ?
Sincerely”
Amazing. He says ” sending videos by polemicists really is not worth anybody’s time”, and then proceeds to link to a **video by a polemicist.** 🙂
Of course, these maunderings by ‘Dr.’ Jeffrey Lang aren’t *polemical*, merely typical whitewash and taqqiya. (I assume he thinks he’s got a fish on the line.)
I just sent him another one, under cover of inquiring about the verses mandating murder and destruction of the unbelievers, asking when he was coming back to the US, in order to ”dominate” Robert Spencer.
If he replies, I’ll post it !
linnte says
Well, he h your number now and guesses what you are “up to”, but that’s good because he knows non Muslims are paying attention. If he ha any foresight at all, this will not bode well for him hahahaha! Good job Mirren!
linnte says
Even I can refute the position of Islam’s scholars! Muhammad has a whole chapter (54) dedicated to telling Muslims that the Qur’an is “easy to remember and understand”. Also, I am at least happy to see Huff take a small step to investigating Islam. I have been challenging them for a few months now stating if ” they have not read the Qur’an then they are supporting something they know nothing about!”.
Jaladhi says
Baldface taqiyya at work. When Quran says murder, it actually means looooo..ve. Why are Muslims allowed to live here??
mortimer says
The Koran is a plagiarized forgery and collection of hate literature fabricated to motivate the troops of the Islamic emperor to commit sadistic atrocities.
The forgery called ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ was a similar plagiarized forgery created in Paris around 1897 using previous forgeries. A cabal of secret agents concocted the ‘Elders of Zion’. I believe the Koran must have been concocted in a similar manner under the caliphate of Abd al Malik. The Koran was plagiarized and forged somewhere between 690 and 705 by Abd al Malik’s secret police.
Jaladhi says
This guy should know that Quran is the evil of the evil books narrated by the world’s foremost criminal Mo and his cohort allah – in short Mo/allah.
KrazyKafir says
What draws these empty shells to Islam? Is it Muhammad’s warmongering, or is it Muhammad’s act of having sex with a 9 year old child? Most human beings, with even one iota of human decency in them, would recoil from such a monster.
mortimer says
Islam’s appeal is a cocktail of supremacism, misogyny, Stockholm syndrome, sadism and self-hatred. No healthy person would want to become a ‘slave’.
Islam is a euphemism for ‘slavery’.
No Fear says
Ditto. Well said. Islam was simply a mechanism to breed more soldiers for Mohammed’s crew of henchmen.
maghan says
Saudi scholars of Islam say Muhammad started with Aisha at 6. The Saudi scholars call it “thighing” which is very popular among those area Muslims who marry just over the toddler stage.
mortimer says
Prof. Joseph Lumbard is a fraud. He knows he can’t ‘dominate’ Robert Spencer in debate about jihad. No Muslim alive believes he can ‘dominate’ Robert Spencer in debate. That’s why they have all given up.
Robert Spencer beats every Muslim in debate…every single one…he beats them like a drum.
The Koran and hadiths say what they say and Joseph Lumbard actually knows that. That’s why he doesn’t debate Robert Spencer.
Joseph Lumbard is an intentional deceiver. His students and colleagues must know it too…at least the clever ones.
Angemon says
A muslim lying to defend islam? I’m shocked, SHOCKED!!!
Westman says
Only slay them if there is aggression against Islam? Islam gets offended whenever it doesn’t get its way and declares it is sufferring aggression and “Islamofauxbia”. Leaving “The Verse Of The Sword” aside, there is quite enough Quranic Allah-pronounced hatred for Jews and unbelievers to justify militant Muslims until the end of time.
What Quran-believing Muslims are doing speaks so loudly that the “Study Quran” stands out like a calliope in a Symphony Orchestra.
Mccfuzz says
The problem with Islam (well one of many) is that it embodies the system of Taqiya which means they can do or say anything providing it’s intent is to further the cause. From our point of view it means we can’t believe a word they say.
Sam says
My understanding is that Koran is a “perfect book” spoken in the beautiful Arabic language no subject to interpretation. So where does this interpretation of Koran business come into play? So a Muslim should not be interpreting the Koran right?
allahu snackbar says
Even IF these verses only apply to that time period, they sure aren’t very peaceful. Afterall, we have this “Islam is peace” crap rammed down our throats all the time….
Gene says
Allah: Hahahahah. I was just kidding.
Anon E. Mous says
If the Quran doesn’t really say kill them, the why do so many Muslims get it wrong? http://thereligionofpeace.com
marble says
Some “experts” respected by an unknowing if “well-educated” public are light-phobic roaches. When will you debate Karen Armstrong?
No Fear says
Why is there so much need to interpret “holy” texts if they are all written by an almighty creator of the universe? Is the creator not able to explain things clearly? Maybe the almighty creator should have used more scientific ways to describe the laws of his universe to us. I prefer knowing about biology and physics and maths and medicine rather than reading some absurd “holy” book which says “KILL all those not in OUR tribe”.
Champ says
Is the quran a good book? Only a nincompoop would think so …
https://youtu.be/mtrtxW_64PU
Vae Victis says
“Kill them” doesn’t mean kill. Seems that we could solve extremism by simplying doing a word substitution. “Kill” means kiss, “slay” means hug, “behead them” means embrace them
daniel obrien says
It doesn’t matter WHAT this guy thinks. All that matters is that 10% (pick a percentage) of the 1.6BILLION think, or in otherwords 160MILLION Muslims.
gravenimage says
Muslim prof Joseph Lumbard: When Quran says “kill them,” it doesn’t mean it
………………………..
Of course not–it means give them a cookie. Don’t you speak Classical Arabic, you greasy Islamophobes?
Seriously, though, this line: “heeding the call to fight issued in Quran 9:5 is thus conditional upon there being an existing state of aggression” pretends to ignore the fact that Muslims consider us merely refusing to submit to Islam to be “aggression”.
linnte says
BOOM! Let alone say something “negative” about it!
خَليفة says
“Give them a cookie?”
Yeah, make a batch of “better than suicide-vest cookies” ( which is pretty much any cookie )
Marty says
Well over a thousand years of history shows that countless millions of mohammedans
don’t agree with this thesis.
The Amhadis are a muslim sect that believes in peaceful coexistence with other
religions.
In the UK yesterday a kindly & very popular muslim Amhadi citizen, who loved Christians & Jews as
his brothers and sisters, wished his Christian friends a happy Easter on his Facebook page.
Five hours later he was stabbed many times and had his had repeatedly jumped on by a
bearded man in Pakistani robes. Now arrested, even the BBC has identified the brute
as a muslim.
As well as with the murderer, the blame lies with the multiculturalists
& their support for vile “faith” schools & sharia courts.
Multiculturalism equals national suicide.
Which is why muslim nations do not tolerate it.
bostongal912 says
So This guy converted to Islam? What the hell for! I can’t understand how anyone would believe that this so called prophet Mohammad was legit! I think he was a real nut job/con man! A power hungry, violent, baby rapist, lying POS! Just my opinion!!! Islam is evil!!!
BC says
Islam has been in a state of more or less perpetual warfare since its beginning. It invaded other lands
including Christian lands Egypt is an example, and tried to extend its territory into Europe. Duing WW2 it allied with the Nazis forming an SS division to help killing the Jews It has also been at war internally Shia against Sunni.
Russell Kirk Was Right says
A supposedly divine source which is so fundamentally confusing isn’t worth serious consideration. Apparently omnipotence and omniscience stops short of plain communication.
Edward says
When Quran says “kill them,” it doesn’t mean it.
YES IT DOES, THE KORAN’S BUILT-IN LOOPHOLES MANDATES IT!
LOOPHOLE: a means of escape; especially, an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded.
Simply put, Islam kills FREE WILL…….”you join islam or you DIE” (because the koran mandates it)…..basically islam might have being a religion of peace at one time, because the OT and the NT tenets were used as islam’s foundation (BTW, most of the Holy book’s player’s are still named in the koran)……but in time men have abrogated and consequently desecrated it’s Holy tenets to one of that gives man ungodly control of others….which is CERTAINLY NOT GODLY……for Man is created in GOD’S IMAGE AND BELONGS TO GOD’S FOLD and not in man’s grasp!
Matt says
Even if the Quran and Sunnah were being misunderstood by such a large degree of Muslims, this STILL leaves the question as to what is so peculiar about Islam that its adherents who are messing it all up do so in such a violent and oppressive way.
For example, Christians can have all sorts of views on the Bible, but they don’t strap on bomb vests and blow themselves up in crowded areas yelling, “Jesus is Lord!” Indeed, they, and Jews and Mormons and JWs and Buddhists don’t plan sophisticated, multi-location attacks on civilian targets, crash planes into buildings and chop people up for the world to see.
So, again, how exactly can these Muslim apologists explain how “misunderstanding” Islam–a supposedly “peaceful” religion–lead to such bloody results?
Demsci says
“/this STILL leaves the question as to what is so peculiar about Islam that its adherents who are messing it all up do so in such a violent and oppressive way.”//
Precisely, and would that not be because of poor clarity-quality of the original core-texts, with or without the explainers, tafsirs? Think massive incompleteness, obsoleteness, frozen in time-ness, ambiguity and proneness to misinterpretation, violent interpretation due to that etc.
Or, as David Wood so brilliantly says; Due to the very poor communicationskills of Allah?
Who, in addition, promised never ever again send a prophit for additional instructions, or corrections?Until the day of Judgement, which Allah then postponed for 1400 years, we are asked to believe or respect.
Western Canadian says
Lumbard, libtard… a coincidence, and a fantastically accurate one!!
خَليفة says
If by “good” you mean full of inconsistencies, contradictions, scientifically inaccurate statements, historical flaws and achronisims plagiarized and distorted portions of other works and sheer stupidity, then, yes.
Drinking poison is good if you want to die.