The Huffington Post must be getting nervous that too many people are discovering the truth about what Islamic texts really say. Thus they have given three Islamic apologists space to explain that the hadith in which Muhammad is depicted as prophesying that Muslims will bring on the end times by killing Jews wholesale is really quite benign and nothing to worry about at all.
Here is the fullest version of the hadith, which appears many times in shorter forms in the two hadith collections that Muslims consider most reliable, Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim:
“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim 6985)
To whitewash that is a tall order, and the results in the HuffPo are predictably meager. The thrust of the argument below is that the text refers only to the unrighteous Jews, not the righteous ones. Oh, okay. What the HuffPo doesn’t tell you, however, is that while the Qur’an promises Paradise to the Jews (2:62), it also says that the “unbelievers among the People of the Book,” a group that includes the Jews, are “the most vile of created beings” and are headed for hell (98:6). How can those two statements be reconciled? Very easily: the Jews who are righteous and will be saved are those who accept Muhammad as a prophet and become Muslims, and the Jews who are hellbound are those who remain Jewish. As the Tafsir al-Jalalayn explains: “Before his arrival they had all agreed to believe in him when he would come; then those who disbelieved in him from among them became envious of him.”
So the HuffPo is publishing a slyly dishonest piece that is endorsing the traditional Islamic idea that Jews have to convert to Islam to be saved. When will they publish explanations of problematic bits of Jewish or Christian scripture? Don’t hold your breath; hell hasn’t frozen over yet.
“The ‘Jew Killing Hadith’ And The Myth of An Antisemitic Genocide In Muslim Scripture,” by Nazir Khan, Omar Suleiman, and Justin Parrott, Huffington Post, March 30, 2017:
A Jordanian cleric visiting Canada recently misleadingly cited a hadith without context or explanation, which rightly triggered condemnations from the Muslim community as well as numerous headlines around the world. A hadith is an oral report transmitted from the Prophet Muhammad, and can be incredibly complex as one needs to evaluate all the chains of transmission of a particular statement recorded in a hadith in order to arrive at an appropriate conclusion of what the particular hadith is actually talking about. In this case, a single phrase was cited, one describing rocks and trees calling out to Muslims, “There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.”
This is not the first time that this text has been used to foment anti-Semitic sentiment within the Muslim community. Muslim leaders and scholars must forcefully denounce such rhetoric and clarify Islam’s unequivocal condemnation of all forms of anti-semitism, racism, discrimination, and xenophobia. Of course, Islamophobes pounced on the opportunity to trigger alarm bells and generate a new wave of propaganda accusing Muslims of genocidal ambitions towards Jews, and to claim that Islam is inherently anti-Semitic and a threat to Western civilization.
Explanation of the misquoted hadith
A story about a supernatural apocalyptic battle between good and evil
When we look up different narrations of the Hadith in question, we find out that the phrase being quoted is actually part of a larger narrative in the genre of eschatology (the part of theology dealing with the end times and the Day of Judgment), describing the return of Jesus and the apocalyptic battle between Jesus and the Dajjal (Antichrist). [1] In this battle that will take place between the armies of Jesus and the Dajjal, several miracles are said to occur including that the Dajjal will melt when Jesus sees him, and that inanimate rocks and trees will speak and identify soldiers of the Dajjal (Sunan Ibn Majah 4077).
This is a story about a battle between two groups of soldiers involved in war, one side of which is clearly unjust; it does not refer to innocent civilians. And it’s not actually a battle about ‘Muslims versus Jews’! As a matter of fact, Muslims believe that all righteous Christians, Jews, and Muslims will be following Jesus after he returns (Qur’an 4:159), while misguided Christians, Jews, and Muslims will be following the Dajjal. Indeed, other Hadith demonstrate that many of the Dajjal’s forces will actually be deviant Muslims (Sunan Ibn Majah 179).[2]
Jews are amongst the good guys in the Muslim apocalypse
Moreover, the vast majority of Jews will NOT be followers of the Dajjal, as hadith commentary describe that the Dajjal’s followers will come from only two out of the twelve Israelite tribes, while most Jews will be righteous folk amongst the forces of good uniting with virtuous Christians and Muslims (Fayd al-Bari, Anwar Shah Kashmiri, 4/197). [3] After all, the Dajjal will be a murderous dictator who claims to be God, an anathema to all followers of the Abrahamic tradition as well as to all people of conscience.
Muslims do not believe that rocks and trees will be pointing out random innocent bystanders, but rather soldiers of the Dajjal – combatants who are themselves involved in killing innocent people. It is about these specific combatants in the Antichrist army that rocks and trees will say, “There is one hiding behind me, come and slay him!” The religious identity of the Dajjal’s soldiers includes evildoers from all backgrounds (including misguided Muslims). Other variants of the hadith state that the rocks and trees will simply say, “Here is a rejector of truth hiding behind me!” (Musnad Ahmad 3546), and do not use the word “Jew” to describe them.
Therefore, this hadith describes a future battle between warriors and can only occur after the return of Jesus; in no way can this hadith be interpreted as a prescription to go out and harm civilians or peaceful members of any faith community. The Qur’an explicitly condemns violence against civilians and non-combatants, stating “Whoever kills a soul it is as if he has slain all humanity,” (5:32) and, “So if they withdraw and do not fight you, and offer you peace, then God gives you no way against them,” (4:90). War is only permitted in defense against aggression or to aid the oppressed, as in the case of Jesus fighting against the Dajjal’s forces….
The Confessions says
Wow, glad they cleared that up. Are HuffPo now going to go down to Al-Azhar University, Tehran, Gaza, Beirut and Riyadh to explain to them how they’ve got it all wrong?
=================================
https://theconfessionsweb.wordpress.com
salim says
I am glad too. It explains to me why some Jews convert to Islam (eg Yusuf Khattab) , and why others are apologists for Muslims. They must be the righteous ones who go to paradise ..!
Its all clear now!
billdeserthills says
Funny, I never heard of an islamic jew
mortimer says
Muslims raise their children to HATE JEWS. They never question it. If you attend Al Quds Day rallies, you will find Muslims from every country who get together in a party atmosphere to hate Jews. It is frightening to me and I’m not Jewish.
Watch this:
David Cameron says
I believe that they’re known as mentally ill
God's Warrior says
Even an expert word juggler will find difficulty in mapping their smoke screen to history. While Islam tries to destroy all evidence of the past, that task is too monumental.
We can see their evil past, see their evil presence, and know their future intentions. The words are there, and we can see that a snake is a snake – not a rope as the forked-tongued juggler pretends.
no_one says
Not surprised. Last year HuffPoo told Christians it was time to accept muhammad as prophet and convert to islam. That was written by a “theologian”.
davej says
The HuffPo routinely publishes this type of pro-Islam propaganda – are they owned by CAIR?
You can’t even comment on their bullshit without being a facebook drone.
I hate HuffPo almost as much as I hate Izlam.
Venatus says
Simple query at the MEMRI site for Gharqad:
https://www.memri.org/search-results?keywords=Gharqad&content_type%5Barticle%5D=article
mortimer says
Huffington Post will discredit itself the more its readers discover about real Islam. The whitewashing will backfire.
mortimer says
Well over 100 ANTI-SEMITIC VERSES in the Koran and a few hundred anti-Semitic lines in the hadiths prove that Islam is systemically ANTI-SEMITIC.
August West says
This article is illuminating in many ways:
1)The article quotes 8 references: None of which refer to the actual Hadith in question.
2)The article seem to be rather long. Why would such a long article be needed to explain an hadith that is only 83 words. The 83 words includes the annoying “may peace be upon him” stuff.
3)The Muslim cleric that came to Canada and supposedly caused a fuss by quoting this hadith was from Jordon. The Muslim’s that are “explaining” the hadith are from Manitoba and Dallas. Isn’t that strange?
This item reminds me of the Milestones book where the author discusses building bridges and showing the “mecca” and “medina” sides of Islam strategically. Perhaps that strategy is at play here? Shoe median to the muslims in the mosque, and show mecca to the idiots that read huff po.
4)Article 7 of The Hamas Covenant does quote this hadith directly. This article is 6 paragraphs long and is easy to read. No where can one find the “clarifying explanations” given by the huffington post authors.
Perhaps when these authors say “This is not the first time that this text has been used to foment anti-Semitic sentiment within the Muslim community” they are referring to the Hamas Charter example.
Perhaps they should explain things to the guys over at Hamas and clear this confusion up.
5)The article says that only Jews who are members of the antichrist’s army in the end of times are being called out in the hadith. It is really weird that the hadith would specify which tree (the Gharkad Tree) would not call out “there is a Jew behind me”, but would omit a major fact like “this hadith only applies to certain Jews and not all of them”. Also one might presume that that the antichrist’s army would be composed of Jews, Christians, atheists and satanists etc. Why prey tell would the hadith only refer to Jews and not the other constituents of the antichrist’s army?
Why of course Islam is a religion of peace… why ever would you ask?
ECAW says
Well picked apart August. Just to add 3 points:
1. Here is the Hamas Charter:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
This is their version of the hadith in question (in Article 7). No mention of good or bad Jews, comabatant or non-combatant Jews, just “the Jews”:
“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.” (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
2. Not surprising that they didn’t include the view of Yusuf al-Qaradawi the most influential cleric in the Islamic world:
“Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the Jews people who would punish them for their corruption…The last punishment was carried out by Adolf Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them…Allah Willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.”
3. And they ended the article with the laughably doctored 5:32, “He who kills a soul…etc”. No one with any knowledge of Islam falls for that one any more (I would hope). It just shows who HuffPo think their target audience is.
Richard says
The Huffington Post piece is fascinating to me because (if what they write about the Dajjal and his forces was really part of the hadith), it would equate with a very ancient Christian belief held by the Church Fathers, but almost completely forgotten today. The numbering of the twelve tribes of Israel in Revelation/Apocalypse are not the twelve tribes (as the hadith says). St. John’s vision added the two half-tribes of Joseph in order to delete one of those half tribes (Ephraim) and the tribe of Dan. Those were the two tribes on whose territories altars were built to divert people from praying in Jerusalem, for which apparently they have no descendants in heaven). The one responsible for the defection of ten of the twelve tribes, Jeroboam, who instigated the rebellion of the ten tribes, was of the half tribe of Ephraim and the Church has always believed (though forgotten today) that the Antichrist would be from the tribe of Dan. That is because Jacob’s dying prophecy concerning Dan was “Dan shall judge his people like another tribe of Israel [Ephraim?]. Let Dan be a snake in the way, a serpent in the path, that biteth the horse’s heels that the rider may fall backward.”. This accords with God’s curse on satan in Genesis iii;15: ‘I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lay in wait for her heel.” It is notable that Jesus chose to be baptized in the River Jordan, which is Yordann, meaning the Descent of Dan, at a place whose name means “Roll Back” because it was where God rolled back the river so the Jews could cross and where the Jews then rolled back their foreskins and were circumcised. In this light, it could be interpreted as Jesus choosing to be baptized there to roll back the descent of mankind into hell. In any event, the Muslim hadith seems to bear some lost understanding of this. Many things in Islam were copied from early Catholic beliefs and practices which Catholics have lost, but Muslims have kept, usually in a very distorted way. This seems to be one more.
dumbledoresarmy says
Not ‘copied’. And certainly not ‘innocently’ or accidentally or ignorantly ‘distorted’. Rather: deliberately plagiarised and then inverted, turned upside down and inside out and gutted of all original meaning.
Richard says
Absolutely! Much of what Mohammed “received from Allah” is mistaken, but all of it is indeed as you say – twisted to suit his perverted preferences. The interesting thing to me about that hadith is that it showed in Islam something very obscure that is forgotten in Christianity. The multiple prayers a day, the praying with the face to the ground, the covering of women’s hair the anointing of the senses, etc. all came from the Catholic Church. I assume that was done to try to get Christian converts. I have read that Mohammed actually offered to have Muslims pray facing Jerusalem if the Catholic Church would become Muslim, though this may be false. I will stick with the word “copied” (a kind symonym for your more correct “plagiarized”), and much of it may have been distorted out of ignorance (something impossible for a revealed “religion” such as Islam claims to be). Certainly you are absolutely correct in that it was “inverted, turned upside down and inside out, and gutted of all original meaning.” Again, this was largely done to gain converts, but no sane Christian or Jew could ever have anything to do with their “religion”. Islam makes India’s cult of Kali look like the Salvation Army.
dumbledoresarmy says
From the lying Mohammedan spin-doctors, busy peddling bs and doublespeak – “…War is only permitted in defense against aggression or to aid the oppressed,..”.
Suuuuure. But: they’re hoping we don’t know the special Islamspeak definition of ‘aggression’ and ‘oppression’.
Because from the Muslim POV Mr Spencer is engaging in ‘aggression’ by publicly criticising and resisting Islam. And wherever Muslims are not able to do *whatever they like* to non-Muslims – up to and including rape, pillage, mass-murder – and wherever Muslims are not able to do their sharia thing (such as honor murdering uppity daughters, killing apostates and ‘blasphemers’, stoning ‘adulterers’, marrying and raping child brides, beating up their might-be-rebellious wives, marrying multiple wives and keeping sex slaves – they deem themselves to be most horribly ‘oppressed’.
A few acerbic discussions of this phenomenon.
First, Daniel Greenfield, tearing a strip off the whining mohammedan theatre of victimhood.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2011/11/dangers-of-legitimizing-islamic.html
Sunday, November 13, 2011
The Dangers of Legitimizing Muslim Grievances
“…Muslim grievances are the frustration of conquerors, the broken teeth of predators who weren’t allowed to feed on the world until their stomachs burst….
“To a Muslim, “injustice” means a lack of Islamic jurisprudence.
” A Non-Muslim state is always “unjust” simply because it is not ruled by Islamic law.
“The fundamental Muslim grievance is that they are not in power, not just in Israel where the world has accepted their demand to be in power as a wholly moral and legitimate demand, or throughout the Muslim world where Western governments have helped bring the Islamists to power with bombs and political pressure.
“The fundamental grievance is that they are not in power… everywhere….”.
*That* is the state of ‘oppression’ under which Muslims feel themselves to be labouring; that although they control a vast chunk of the world’s surface, and a massive chunk of its non-renewable energy supply (from which they have taken in trillions of dollars in unearned revenue – windfall money – since 1973, and although they comprise 25 percent of the world’s population, and make up a dangerous and dominant voting bloc at the United Nations – the Islamintern – they are not *yet* in possession of Total World Domination. They are not *yet* able to rape, rob, enslave, murder, and do whatsover they please to *everybody* else on the planet. Oh, they are sooooo ‘oppressed’. And *that* is the situation that they expect their hideous ‘Isa’ (who has NOTHING whatsoever in common with the Biblical Jesus) to ‘remedy’… by killing all those wicked jOooz and Christians who insist on worshipping the Biblical God rather than bowing down to infernal ‘allah’ the arab demon of blood and war.
As Greenfield says in the same article – “…The purpose of war is conquest.
“Islam treats Muslim conquest as a form of justice.
“A failed conquest is an injustice….
“Since no Muslim should ever have to live under the unjust (from their POV – dda) rule of infidels, there is always a cause for war and a fifth column waiting to rise up and demand their right to rule over everyone else. …”.
Some more, on the same subject of the Muslim definition of ‘oppression’, from a Bengali ex-Muslim, Abul Kasem – “When Is Islam Oppressed?” He placed it online in 2005. It has not dated.
http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/IslamOppressed.htm
“…One fact stands out very clear from the hypocrisy of the Islamists. This fact is: Islam is grossly offended/oppressed by any un-Islamic moves of the infidels/ not-so-good Muslims..”.
And (bear this in mind as you think of the use of the term ‘aggression’ in the Huffington Post article under discussion) Abul Kasem also explains what ‘waging war” means, in Islamspeak:
“…”Punishment for waging war against Allah (i.e. the unbelievers who reject Islam) and His messenger is execution (beheading) or crucifixion or cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land…5:33”
“One might still insist that the above verse is applicable only in war situations, when Islam and its founder, Muhammad (or Muslims) are/were attacked in a physical fight.
“Perish this thought, if you want to learn about ‘real Islam’.
“The words, ‘waging war’, in the above verse has very little to do with real combat (like Iraq, Afghanistan).
“**Any** action, activity, remark, gesture, word/s, sound, utterance, look, manner, habit, conduct, style and so on, which are not in conformity with Islamic precepts are considered as blasphemous or ‘waging war’.
“Thus, even the slightest criticism of Islam, Muhammad, Qur’an or Sharia, verbally or in writing, might be treated as gross violations of Islamic tenets….
“…Below, I have listed a few innocuous activities, manners, social customs, traditions and the daily way of life, which the Kafirs blithely take for granted but which are extremely un-Islamic.
“According to Islamic morals, customs and laws, these offensive activities/practices might be construed as oppressive to Islam and, therefore, they are legitimate targets for eradication, or they must be replaced by Islamic practices or Islamic purification….”.
ECAW says
Thanks for the Greenfield article DDA. Excellent stuff from him, as always.
dumbledoresarmy says
And from July 2006, here at jihadwatch, an article entitled “Islamic Dictionary for Infidels”.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/07/islamic-dictionary-for-infidels.html
Islamic Dictionary for Infidels
Excerpt:
“Islamic apologists in the West keep repeating the mantra that “Jihad isn’t a fight against non-Muslims, but a struggle against tyranny and injustice.”
“Again, the problem is that seen with Islamic eyes, there isn’t too much of a difference between these various terms.
” It’s “oppression”
when Muslim immigrants in the West must live by the same, secular laws as the native infidels, not sharia,
“and “injustice” in the end refers to pretty much all societies not subjugated to obedience to the will of Allah.
“Injustice”
can thus be used to describe all non-Islamic systems, for instance Western democracy.
“The Saudi deputy minister of religious endowments, Abd Al-Rahman Al-Matroudi, stated in an interview on Saudi TV in July 2005 that “the definition of terrorism that concerns us is that it is
any act or statement that contradicts the Koran or Sunna, whether in thought or action.” …”
(Nota bene – according to that definition all of us Islamocritical commenters here at this forum, led by Mr Spencer and his associates such as Mr Hugh Fitzgerald, are ‘terrorists”. – dda).
“…as Tibi has demonstrated, it is not seen as aggression or war when Muslims attack non-Muslims.
“On the contrary, it is seen as aggression when non-Muslims resist the Islamization of their lands and thus “place obstacles in the way” of the spread of Islam. ..”.
dumbledoresarmy says
And Bruno’s essay concludes by explaining very clearly the mindset we are dealing with, the mindset that lies behind the flowery nothings of the slyly smiling apologists who wrote that very misleading article for the ‘Huffington Post’.
“…’Aggression’: When non-Muslims do anything to preserve their culture and resist the Islamization of their country.
“Even when this “aggression” is non-violent, such as publishing a cartoon critical of Islam, this intolerable insult to Islamic supremacy on earth can be answered with violence by Muslims.
“Since a refusal to submit to sharia is a rebellion against Allah, the very existence of non-Muslim communities can be viewed as an act of aggression.”
Stan Lee says
Since the passage of Jew hate has been a part of Islam’s orientation in the life of each Muslim, it has turned each Muslim into a homicidal guided missile ever since the passage was placed into the Hadith, a matter of which Muslims regard same as literally a directive to prove obedience to Islam.
Since the Huffington Post speaks for the Leftists who root for Islam’s intentions, I recommend Huff Po undertakes a mass lobotomy of all Muslims, plus having Islam delete these passages from the Hadith which have motivated Muslims since Islam originated.
Apart from that, Jews who Islam believes will turn to Jesus when he returns, and join with Christendom in worship of Christ, will then be “non-believers” who Islam is directed to either convert or kill.
In any event, no matter who Jews and Christians (and also surely Buddhists and Hindus) are all sworn by Islam as its enemies due to rejecting Islam as their religion for the religions they prefer.
Any way the Muslim dilemma is considered, Islam solves such stand-offs by killing, rather than to live in peace with people who believe in free choice of their own faiths.
Richard says
Stan Lee: Perhaps wrongly, I interpret that hadith as saying the Jews and Christians will turn to Jesus as the Muslims see and revere Him – a human prophet; and since they misinterpret and incorporate into their “religion” much of Judaism and Christianity, I think the hadith is talking about the conversion of Jews and Christians to Islam, fighting for the human Islamic prophet, Jesus, against the Antichrist, just as Christian prophecy is that the end of the world the Jews will convert to Christianity. Otherwise, if it means what you believe, you are absolutely wright and the hadith would seem to make no sense whatsoever. What kind of a tree is that, anyway?
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
The gharqad tree is also known as the boxthorn. See
http://www.theqharqadtree.com/
Richard says
Mr. Spahn: Thank you! Now, to see if someone can figure out that reason that particular tree was chosen. I know Islam is a phony religion, but if more people had read Hitler’s book, we wouldn’t have had Adolph Hitler. Now we have hundreds of millions of him, all quoting a different book that is soaked in 1600 years of kaffir blood.
Richard says
Just checked the great web site you sent. It explains it! Thank you so very much!!
garegin says
I love how the article in question claims “taking things out of context” and then just reiterates the same points that the “Islamophobes” bring up. Of course in the narration the Jews in question are the apostate ones. Because according to Islam, all the good Jews were really Muslims! That’s just stating the obvious. The Jews who opposed the Muslims who got wiped out, were not Muslim Jews, they were Jews who practiced Judaism.
So yeah. Islam is not anti-semetic in a racial sense. No one claimed it was. Duh! They are creating a strawman.
ECAW says
“So yeah. Islam is not anti-semetic in a racial sense. No one claimed it was. Duh! They are creating a strawman.”
And yet Mortimer, a well informed poster, writes this above:
“Well over 100 ANTI-SEMITIC VERSES in the Koran and a few hundred anti-Semitic lines in the hadiths prove that Islam is systemically ANTI-SEMITIC.”
“Anti-Semitism” is a modern term which, as far as I understand, is Jew hatred on racial grounds. Mohammed’s Jew hatred was based on religious grounds ie the Jews of Medina refused to accept him as a prophet. Therefore it is misleading for people on either side to refer to “Islamic anti-Semitism”. “Islamic Jew hatred” will do.
Richard says
ECAW: Darn right the term anti-Semitism for Jews is misleading! Though used exclusively for Jews, as you point out, “Semite/Semitic” is racial term for ALL Semitic peoples. The ARABS themselves are Semites.!
Cthulhu says
“After all, the Dajjal will be a murderous dictator who claims to be God, an anathema to all followers of the Abrahamic tradition as well as to all people of conscience.” Well, it reminds me something… Dajjallah?
ECAW says
Dead right Cthulhu.
duh swami says
I’m sure that pious Muslims appreciate kufr Hufpo explaining their religion to them…
Ethel Red says
I am fed up with all this nonsense about Heaven, Paradise and Hell. We are a product of Evolution and are born to die. From what I have observed, the Christian church followers are declining, as my wife is a Catholic and I see how empty her church is,filled mostly with old Italians, younger Phillipinos and others just following an old boring script. The Islamists seem to have a strong belief and their Mosques are filled with devout followers, who are committed to the nonsense that this Prophet spouted many centuries ago. It is all nonsense, but one day will impact us all, Athiests, Jews, Homosexuals, Non-believers of Islam, who only want to be left in peace. I believe I have one shot at this living and will protect it to the best of my ability.
Mira Chaikin says
Question: Are the Hadith actually written recordings of what Mohammad said or are they interpretations, manmade interpretations by clerics written and recorded throughout Islamic history similar to declarations by Popes or renowned Rabbis?
If so, they are interpretations and not necessarily correct.
Angemon says
Justin Parrott – what an oddly fitting name…
Islamic Mirror says
Koran Single out Jews
Well over 100 ANTI-SEMITIC VERSES in the Koran and a few hundred anti-Semitic lines in the hadiths prove that Islam is systemically ANTI-SEMITIC.
the Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the well-being of the Muslims.
They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82);
as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); claiming that Allah’s power is limited (5:64);
loving to listen to lies (5:41);
disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13);
disputing and quarreling (2:247);
hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78);
staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55);
being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44);
giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87);
wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109);
feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120);
being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18);
devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161);
slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46);
killing the prophets (2:61);
From the Quran, Surah 2:65, 7:116 O Muslims, Jews are a treacherous and deceitful people over whom lies the curse and anger of Allah. They permitted what Allah forbade, with lame excuses; therefore, He cursed and turned them into apes and pigs
being merciless and heartless (2:74);
never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100);
being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79);
being cowardly (59:13-14);
being miserly (4:53);
being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more.
ConanKong says
HuffPo is the same site that had Hillary up by 98%. their word is worth nothing.
762x51FMJ says
Confucius say
hummus and prayer rugs…
make Baba Ghanoush of the brain…
mach37 says
Are the Imams forcing infidels to learn Arabic? In the phrase “… the apocalyptic battle between Jesus and the Dajjal (Antichrist)” – if the Imam is translating everything up to “Dajjal” why not translate Dajjal as well? So what if there are three syllables in Antichrist and only two syllables in Dajjal? The translation ought to be total.
This happens too frequently when A-rabs (pardon the expression) are translating the Qur’an to English; they leave so many Arabic words untranslated. That just burns me up, being forced to constantly refer to an Arabic-to-English dictionary in order to understand an English version of the Qur’an.
Mira Chaikin says
Judgement Day – the Christian and Islamic Judgement Day are the same as Jesus is the angelic entity in control of Judgement Day. Judaism, to my understanding, has Yom Kippur, a yearly “Judgement Day- Day of Atonement” and does not recognize the Judgement Day prophesied in Christianity and Islam.Like it or not, that’s what it says and if you are Christina or Moslem, that’s part of the belief. In the Apocalyptic Battle between Good and Evil, Jesus is the commander, so if you are on the side of Good, you follow him.
Lilythewise says
I am not surprised Huffington Post would do something so dishonest.
They are nothing more than Anti American propaganda.
Anyone who reads their articles is either misinformed or they believe the nonsense they read.