Ever since 9/11, Muslim leaders who have access to the national media have told us that Islam is the religion of peace and that violence does not represent the essence of Muhammad’s religion.
Even President Bush and Britain’s Prime Minister Blair have repeated this assertion, saying that Islam has been “hijacked” by a few violent fanatics. Is this true?
Sadly it is not, for empirical, observable facts demonstrate beyond doubt that Islam at its founding is filled with violence — in the life of Muhammad himself and in the Quran itself.
Hence, these Muslim apologists must stop misleading unsuspecting Westerners, and they must be honest about the heart of their religion, for once and for all.
Here are ten clear, verifiable reasons that explain why Islam is not the religion of peace.
Clear? In order to prevent the standard, reflexive “out of context” defense from Muslim apologists, the context of each verse in the Quran is explained either in this article or in the links provided within each of the ten reasons. No verse is taken out of context, and Muslim translators are used.
Verifiable? The readers are invited to look up each verse in the Quran in multiple translations, by visiting this website and typing in references, like so: 61:10-12. (61 is the chapter or sura, and 10-12 are the verses). Once at the site, they should ignore request for the transliterated Arabic titles of the chapters in the Quran, and just type in the numbers.
Tabari (AD 839-923) is an early Muslim historian who is considered largely reliable by scholars today. In fact, the State University of New York Press selected his history to be translated into 38 volumes. (We use volume 9, pp. 153-55, trans. Ismail K. Poonawala.)
In the context of the list of Muhammad’s assets (horses, camels, milch sheep, and so on) at the end of his life, Tabari records the nicknames of Muhammad’s weapons.
Muhammad nicknames three swords that he took from the Jewish tribe Qaynuqa after he banished them from Medina in April 624: “Pluck Out,” “Very Sharp,” and “Death.” Two other swords from elsewhere are named: “Sharp” and “That is wont to sink” (presumably into human flesh). After his Hijrah or Emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622, he owned two swords called “Sharp” and “Having the vertebrae of the back.” This last sword he collected as booty after his victory at the Battle of Badr in March 624.
Next, Muhammad took three bows from the Qaynuqa tribe and named them as follows: “Most conducive to ease, or wide,” “white,” and “of nab wood” (species of tree from which bows are made).
The name of a coat of mail implies “ampleness” or “redundant portions,” probably because Muhammad was portly (cf. Ibn Ishaq, Life of Muhammad, trans. Guillaume, p. 383).
Finally, even Muhammad himself has a nickname. After Tabari lists the positive ones, he matter-of-factly provides one that is not so positive: “The obliterator.”
-snip-
(James Arlandson in The American Thinker, March 9, 2005)
To Read This Article Click Here
And, at one time, there was a copy of the Koran in my collection. I say "was" because I became so disgusted when reading it, I closed it about half way through and dropped it in the garbage.
And that was before 9-11.
The only other book I've thrown away like that was Mein Kampf.
Boiled down to their root messages, Mein Kampf and the Koran preach the same hatred for mankind.
Even an agnostic such as myself knows that the question "Does Islam Improve On Christianity" is, on it's face, so absurd as to be unworthy of serious consideration.
Islam is terribly inconsistent. Firstly, Mohammed and Islam admit the Bible, both Old and New Testaments are divinely inspired, but then denies the claims of the New Testament as to the Divinity, Crucifixion, Atonement and Resurrection of Christ.
Islam is a cynical plot hatched by the Mecca Chamber of Commerce to increase tourism.
Where's Muhammad?
- John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope
Ping!
Ping!
Muhummed took one of the Christian heresies floating around at the time and twisted it, along with Jewish precepts, forming a political movement for his own twisted ends...islam is nothing more or less than a cult - a very successful one in fact and mainly owed and continues to owe its success to the lack of Christian unity and strength.
Yeh like Hitler and Stalin were improvements on the Kaiser/Czar.....
In order for Islam or any system of relationship with God to improve upon His relationship with man through Christ, one must first look at what "Christianity" implies. To the unbeliever, does it make it any better than to simply have a non-meritorious faith in Christ? For the believer, does it improve upon our ability to confess our sins and repent from them in order to return to fellowship with Him and continue in sanctification?
Even if one believes there is any improvement with respect to man, the more powerful question would then be how such a change could exist and God to remain Holy?, i.e. perfect righteousness and justice in all things if there were any discounting of Christ's faith (Acts 3:22-24)
On the contrary, giving up on Islam merely means giving up on legalism for peace. Seems like the Islam has far less to offer either in practice and in giving it up.
Well, let's see: Kill your enemies instead of forgiving them? Kill or enslave anyone who will not follow Mohammad's teachings, instead of praying for those who will not follow Christ's teachings?
Uuhhh...NO!