Muslim writers who are apologists for jihad seem to be motivated to accomplish two goals. The good and laudable goal is that of dissuading those Muslims who are inclined to use violence for the sake of Islam, Allah, and Muhammad, his Prophet. The second, less commendable goal, is to whitewash the image of Islam in a public relations ploy that tries to make it appear that violence done in the name of Islam has no justification from within the teachings of Islam. We applaud the first goal, but this second effort is disingenuous and deluding.
Somewhat analogous to the Christian idea of Just War theory, the Islamic doctrine of jihad places rules, regulations and restrictions on the use of violence. And as was often the case in Christendom, those rules were ignored in the heat of battle. So often, in the context of battle, the restrictions against indiscriminate violence in jihad often fall apart, and the grossest barbarism breaks out. But let us evaluate whether Islamic doctrine as found in the Qur’an and the example of Muhammad, his closest companions, and followers are, in fact, the basis for the justification of violence done by some Muslims around the world today.
In this short article, I examine some passages of the Qur’an that are viewed as sacred divine revelation by all traditional Muslims, and that are used as justification for violence by jihadi Muslims. Jihadis identify their acts of violence as being truly motivated by these passages, which include 109 verses of the Qur’an. Their use of these passages is meant to demonstrate their religious bona fides to other Muslims.
Since there are many Quranic passages calling for Muslims to use violence for the sake of Islam, their god and Muhammad, Muslims who are trying to mitigate the negative impact of such passages, for either of the above two mentioned purposes, often stridently assert that jihadis who use the Qur’an to justify violence are taking those passages out of context.
In most cases, this context argument is fallacious. First, literary context is not of primary importance in interpreting the Qur’an; instead, Muslim exegetes use what is called the reasons for revelations (asbab an -nazul). Those are ostensibly the historical circumstances in the life of Muhammad that caused Allah to send down the relevant passages of the Qur’an to the his prophet. In a strict sense, no Muslim community in any society faces exactly the circumstances that Muhammad and the first Muslims did. So in order to follow the example of Muhammad and the earliest Muslims, Muslims today extrapolate from something they see as analogous in the circumstances of the Prophet and his earliest followers, and then apply that example to present circumstances. This is an almost infinitely flexible process, and one that all violent jihadis use to justify their violent actions against others.
In this sense, the propaganda of GainPeace, an Islamic non-profit organization based in the Chicago area that works on converting people to Islam, is duplicitous. We will look at two of its premises.
GainPeace states, “Muslims may not begin hostilities. They must strive for peace as much as possible.” It adds, “Hostilities should be ended as soon as the other party is inclined to peace.”
One problem with this is that jihadis are paranoiac, and consider whatever they wish to be as aggression against them. In their schema, Muslims are by definition always becoming the victims of aggression from non-Muslims, unless the Muslims are in political control. Many, if not most, Muslims believe that unless they are ruled by the divine law of Allah (Sharia), they are being subjugated unfairly. The Quran assures their supremacy over all humankind:
“You are indeed the best community that has ever been brought forth for [the good of] mankind (…)” (Quran 3:110)
Also, the Quran orders Muslims, “Fight them so that idolatry will not exist anymore and God’s religion will stand supreme. If they give up the idols), God will be Well Aware of what they do.” (8:39)
Likewise, Muhammad said: “’I have been commanded to fight against people until they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and fulfill the obligation of prayer, and pay the zakat; and if they do it, their lives and property are guaranteed my protection on condition that [they conduct themselves] according to the law of Islam.” (Sahih Muslim 22)
While pagans and idol worshipers are given two options, convert or die, Christian and Jews are given a third option by the Quran: “Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.” (Qur’an 9:29)
GainPeace also states, “Hostilities should be ended as soon as the other party is inclined to peace,” but jihadis will remember the words of their holy book:
“Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens. That (is the ordinance).” (47:4) “(…) So do not falter, and [do not] call for peace when you have the upper hand, and God is with you, and He will not stint you in [the reward for] your works.” (47:35)
This last passage, in addition to the biography of Muhammad, have established for Islam’s jihadi warriors the principle that they should cynically call for peace when they are weak, but not call for peace when they are in a position of strength. GainPeace’s article is actually an example of this.
For generations before Muhammad took up his prophetic mantle, Jewish and Christian tribes lived in peace among pagan Arabs in the Arabian Peninsula. By the time of his death, Muhammad had killed or driven out all those Jews and subjugated the Christians under the rule of Sharia. Jihad is sometimes violence, sometimes subterfuge. GainPeace’s article serves the jihadi goal by means of the latter technique.
In order to achieve any progress in our human relations with American Muslims, and duplicitous Islamist organizations such as GainPeace, an honest and transparent discussion of our differences as well as of our common values should take place. Exchanging lies would lead us nowhere but to swamps of blood and tears, as in the so many failing states of the Middle East and North Africa.
The Rev. Darrell Pack is an Arabist who spent more than 15 years in North Africa, and a board member of Islamic Reform Forum, Illinois.
FYI says
“islam:the way of Abraham,Moses,Jesus and muhammed” it says.
They mean..the koranic counterfeits:
Ibrahim the muslim: as “Abraham was not a Jew” koran 3:67
musa the muslim: who received the Torah from allah {koran 2:87}a god who insists he only writes in Arabic {koran 41:44} and yet we know the Torah is in HEBREW,a language allah doesn’t write.
“Jesus” of the koran:an Arabic speaking muslim{definitely NOT JEWISH}who had the Gospel{koran 5:46}{surely a surprise to Biblical Scholars as it came AFTER the time of Jesus didn’t it?}
This is “Jesus” in the koran,the dawa folk will tell you {to fool the Christians}:
“He spake!Lo!I am the slave of allah.he hath given me the scripture and appointed me a prophet”
koran 19 v 30
This sometimes appears on dawa booths.Remember this.
This,however, isn’t an adult speaking:this is a newborn INFANT in a crib as you will see from the context{Koran 19:22-30 especially koran 19:29 when visitors wonder how they can speak to “one who is in the cradle”:But luckily for them this “Jesus” speaks like an ADULT and how convenient for allah that this INFANT “Jesus” speaks Arabic}
The way of the REAL Biblical Abraham,Moses and Jesus:obeying the official commandements of God{Exodus 20 Decalogue+ the 2 chief laws{#1Deut6:4-9 LOVE GOD,#2 Lev 19:18 LOVE OTHERS}
The way of muhammed{“I have fabricated things AGAINST GOD” al tabri 6:111} and his ARAB god al lah{“The GREATEST of deceivers” koran 3:54}: a way that does NOT follow the Biblical Law,MISSED the Golden Rule,no “love thy neighbor” etc
Don’t be fooled by these bogus apologists for islam and their religion of “peace”,a religion that CURSES Jews and Christians koran 9:30
gravenimage says
+1
David says
The visitors to the baby Jesus, were clearly having an hallucination, or else someone made up a childish story, and duped a lot of gullible muslims. Islam is like a spoilt child, who behaves lika a psychopath.
Does anyone challenge these DAWA booths? I have a saying: DAWAM: Don’t Argue With A Muslim. It is mostly a waste of time and breath. The best thing to do is educate infidels about the real purpose of islam. At the moment we have the upper hand
FYI says
I’m sure if you asked a Rabbi about the Torah you would get an honest answer:”say Rabbi,what does it say in Exodus 20 in Hebrew?”.The Rabbi would surely reply that that is simply the Decalogue and of course can be perfectly understood when translated from Hebrew to English.
I’m sure If you asked a Priest or Pastor about the Gospel you would get an honest answer:”say Reverend,what does it say in this Greek Bible?”,they would surely be happy to explain it to you and tell you it can be perfectly understood when translated from Greek to English.
islamic “scholars”?
If you asked them to explain a passage in the koran
1]To a non-Arabic speaking muslim{say a Farsi/Urdu speaker}
“Oh you couldn’t possibly understand Arabic,especially in the koran”
2]To an Arabic speaking muslim seeking answers;
“Oh you couldn’t possibly understand the CLASSICAL Arabic of the koran.only islamic scholars understand it”
3]To an infidel:
“It is forbidden and cannot be translated from Arabic into English properly.The Arabic is too sublime for that”
How convenient for the’holy’ men of islam to play that game..since allah insists he only speaks ONE language,Arabic{unlike the Biblical God who can be understood in ANY language which is why you find a aBible in ANY language..}
Ask a muslim “scholar” and you will likely get a dishonest answer.
gravenimage says
A few years ago I challenged Why Islam? members at a table in San Francisco to see what they had to say.
After the usual whitewash, when they realized I knew something about Islam, I was shocked when they admitted that Islam abuses women and considered Christians fair game for murder. Of course, they thought these were both *good things*.
Wellington says
The entirety of Islam respecting why it is uniquely dangerous among the major religions of the world is something I have mentioned before and it is the “third threat.” I will explain again and excuse me for repeating this.
Virtually every religion has two threats: 1) Something bad will happen to you in the next life if you don’t believe or do this, that or something else; and 2) The deity or deities of a religion might do some kind of harm to you in this world if you don’t believe or do this, that or something else. Here Islam is no different from other religions and if only these two threats existed in Islam it would not be the menace to the world which it surely is.
The reason Islam is such a menace, quite deadly actually, as well as being a royal pain-in-the ass, is because of the “third threat.” It is unique to Islam respecting what can be found in the ideology or theological blueprint of a religion. This “third threat” not only allows but commands its followers in this world to use force to insure that Islam is preserved and eventually expanded across the globe. No other major faith (or minor faith for that matter) actually and actively in its own ideological make-up encourages and instructs its believers to wage war to spread the religion or to kill a believer who leaves the religion (or to harm or kill someone who criticizes the religion). Islam has at least 109 verses in the Koran alone calling upon its deluded believers to wage war across the earth “until all religion is with Allah.” {Sura 8:39} By contrast as an example, the New Testament has 0 verses in it instructing Christians to wage war in the name of their religion. And Islam also instructs its believers to terminate the life of a Muslim who leaves Islam, examples to be found are Sura 4:89 in the Koran and Mohammed’s own statement about this in the Bukhari Hadith 9.84.57. This is why Islam is awful and highly injurious to freedom in a way no other major religion even remotely is. It’s because of this “third threat.” And I would add here something very important and that is that when those from other religions used force to spread the religion or physically punish a believer for some kind of lapse such people were violating their own religion’s tenets, Christians for instance who did this in past centuries. The contrast with Islam could not be greater because Muslims are fulfilling a major dictate of their faith when using force to extend it while those of other religions are not fulfilling a major dictate of their creed when doing so, indeed they are in violation of what their faith preaches (the one-time violence condoned in the Old Testament is descriptive and not prescriptive, contra Koranic instruction, and thus hugely different even if one is critical of such violence condoned in the OT—apples and oranges here).
So, getting to this article by Darrell Pack, any Muslim who preaches that Muslims should not use violence where their religion is concerned is either 1) ignorant of Islam’s own teachings; or 2) engaging in deliberate deception. Might as well, if one were a Nazi, assert that Nazism respects Jews and admires their many achievements or, if a Marxist, maintain that capitalism is the finest, most productive and decent economic system ever developed by man.
Can’t square the circle. The use of violence is endemic to Islam. Take the violence element out of Islam, which is to say remove the “third threat,” and you’d have only a shell of Islam left, you’d have to gut it like a fish (excuse me for mixing metaphors). Violence and Islam are natural allies and this is why Islam is a danger to mankind as no other religion comes anywhere close to being. The “third threat” in Islam disallows freedom of speech and freedom of religion; it also disallows equality under the law. No getting around this and anyone who sincerely thinks you can is deluding himself. And this is why I personally detest Islam—because of the damn “third threat.”
Michael Copeland says
“Violence is the heart of Islam”
Ayatollah Yazdı
darrell Pack says
Your “Third threat”, is a great way to express the problem thanks for adding to the conversation
Darrell Pack
Wellington says
Thank you, Darell Pack.
gravenimage says
+1
James Lincoln says
Wellington says,
“The use of violence is endemic to Islam. Take the violence element out of Islam, which is to say remove the “third threat,” and you’d have only a shell of Islam left…”
100% true.
islam without violence would still be “nonsensical, stupid, etc.,” – but not threatening…
gravenimage says
Fine post, Wellington.
David says
There is very ltitle to like about islam. Its very promotion is based on lies, like a car salesman selling an old wreck, by extolling its ‘virtues’ (good runner; one previous owner{Muhammad}), and ignoring the clapped out engine, with worn-out pistons. Not to mention: Dangerous tyres; knackered steering. You get the picture?
Daniel Triplett says
Excellent analysis
gravenimage says
GainPeace’s Whitewashing of Jihad
…………………..
Why do so many foolish Infidels whitewash Islam? Utterly sucidal.
More:
Somewhat analogous to the Christian idea of Just War theory, the Islamic doctrine of jihad places rules, regulations and restrictions on the use of violence. And as was often the case in Christendom, those rules were ignored in the heat of battle.
…………………..
This is *not* the only problem. In fact, Muhammed himself used such horrors as killing old women by tying them to camels and pulling them apart.
The model of the “Prophet” is far more enabling Muslim violent than it is mandating brakes on it.
And anything that furthers the cause of Islam is seen as a “just war” in Islam–and that includes any savagery done to unbelievers.
More:
Since there are many Quranic passages calling for Muslims to use violence for the sake of Islam, their god and Muhammad, Muslims who are trying to mitigate the negative impact of such passages, for either of the above two mentioned purposes, often stridently assert that jihadis who use the Qur’an to justify violence are taking those passages out of context.
In most cases, this context argument is fallacious…
…………………..
*Very* true. Muslims who claim that any of these passages only applied to 7th century Arabia are *lying*.
More:
In this sense, the propaganda of GainPeace, an Islamic non-profit organization based in the Chicago area that works on converting people to Islam, is duplicitous.
…………………..
And Taqiyya–lying to the infidels if it profits Islam–is very much a part of Islam itself.
More:
GainPeace states, “Muslims may not begin hostilities. They must strive for peace as much as possible.” It adds, “Hostilities should be ended as soon as the other party is inclined to peace.”
…………………..
Of course, merely not submitting to Islam or doing anything at all to retard its spread–no matter how peaceful–is deemed hostility by pious Muslims. And “inclining to peace” only holds if the unbelievers submit to Islam.
While this *sounds* to Infidels as if this is about Kuffar starting wars and Muslims ending hostilities as soon as the unbelievers end their attacks, the real meaning is anything but.
More:
“You are indeed the best community that has ever been brought forth for [the good of] mankind (…)” (Quran 3:110)
Also, the Quran orders Muslims, “Fight them so that idolatry will not exist anymore and God’s religion will stand supreme. If they give up the idols), God will be Well Aware of what they do.” (8:39)
…………………..
Yes–this is all about spreading Islam–usually violently.
Thank you, Reverend Pack, for this expose about GainPeace.
David says
The fact that muslims claim jihadi killers take the Koran out of context and kill people is irrelevant. For whatever reason, they still do it and are guilty of murder. Take away the ‘misunderstood’ text, stop preaching violence, and the problem will go away. How about giving that a try, muslim imams? Give it a try? Not a snowball’s chance in Hell! They cry: “It is the word of Allah! It can’t be changed”; however evil it clearly is.
Do muslims like being attacked? (Christchurch mosques) No they certainly don’t! Count the number of mosque attacks, against the number of Church and Synangogue attacks. A massive imbalance will be noticed.
PRCS says
“Of course, merely not submitting to Islam or doing anything at all to retard its spread–no matter how peaceful–is deemed hostility by pious Muslims. And “inclining to peace” only holds if the unbelievers submit to Islam.”
Qur’an 9:29 being one of those inexplicably “out of context/only/only in Muhammad’s time/have to read Qur’an in Arabic/perversion of the ROP” misinterpretation of Allah’s infallible, literal ‘revealed’ word.
PRCS says
The Dawa Dude on the left has a YouTube channel.
Typical audience consists of clueless Christian students, adults, and elderly folks, and some on- the-spot ‘reversions’ by those ‘who–as Hugh Fitzgerald often notes–have apparently done nothing to prepare for these encounters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhZy_r11Rx4
gravenimage says
Thanks for the link, PRCS.
David says
Imagine a different scenario. A roomful of muslims listening to a Christian person. No, I can’t imagine that. What we clearly need is a Christian person educating a roomful of non muslims about the true nature and aims of islam: World domination, and the subduing of infidels. Islam needs the Jizya, without which they find it hard to survive. Parasites need a living host.
PRCS says
“A roomful of muslims listening to a Christian person.”
Or any other “unbeliever”.
gravenimage says
+1
ronyvo says
In my opinion it is a CRIME to allow promotion of killing, rape, destruction….Which is the real Islam.
Where are the parents of those kids?????
All what I heard lies and lies. TRUTH does not exist in Islam, as if I am listening to Satan, The difference is, I know the real Islam. My first 25 years of my life lived in Islamic country, Egypt was 96+% Christians when Islam invaded her. I was FORCED to study the Koran and hadiths by imam from Al-Azhar University in middle and high school. I got the Islamic treatment fist hand, it was a nightmare.
Sadly, my nightmare started again with 9/11, I thought then that that is the end of Islam, BUT I was wrong. Actually to mu utter surprise and dismay Muslims are gaining grounds all over. I attribute this to the fact that the westerners abandoned our Lord Jesus and follow nothing or the Devil.
gravenimage says
Excellent but heartbreaking post, royvo.
End PC says
The underlying goal of both endeavors is to ally fear of Islam & Muslims while the Muslim population increases. The real long range intention is
Muslim migration & population growth –> colonization –> subjugation & population replacement.
“For Islam the whole earth is a wakf, a territory belonging to Allah and promised to the Muslim community that will bring it under the reign of the Islamic order revealed to the Prophet. Jihad is the striving to recover those wakf lands illegally held by infidels that must be returned to the Muslims. The conquest of non-Muslim territories is described in Muslim legal and historical texts on jihad as the return of lands by Allah to the Muslims, implying the recovery of a prior possession and the illegality of any non-Muslim sovereignty. This sense of re-appropriation by jihad of territory belonging to Islam qualifies jihad as a defensive, just, and legitimate Muslim war because it reinstates the will of Allah and brings peace through the submission and humiliation of the non-Muslim. The very existence of disbelief is an aggression against Allah.”
Bat Ye’or, “Europe, Globalization, and the Coming of the Universal Caliphate”
steven katanica says
the term peace(in the islaimc sense) is very deceptive. the soviet union was peaceful, china is peaceful, saudi arabia is peaceful, but at what price? the elimination of individual freedoms, so even if an islamic nation seems peaceful, within that nation is a situation of absolute servitude and indeed slavery
tim gallagher says
Islam is intrinsically violent, as other commenters have mentioned up above. Personally, I only have the time of day for people who leave Islam. Islam is a rotting carcass with nothing good about it at all. Of course, I realise that some Muslims can’t safely leave (they’d be killed as apostates), but any Muslim that can leave should ditch islam. I can’t cop these clowns who stay inside rotten Islam and try to whitewash its foul content. I am very suspicious of their motives. I admire people like Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Ali Sina and the others who ditched Islam. Having people walk out on it is what Islam deserves.