Posted on 11/20/2015 7:51:59 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Question: Do moderate Muslims believe in the Quran, sharia law, jihad, infidels, dhimmi, etc?
If so, why would they be considered "moderate" and why should any of them be allowed into our country under any circumstances whatsoever?
The Quran, sharia law, jihad, infidels, dhimmi, etc, are beliefs, laws and concepts that are antithetical to our Judeo-Christian system of government, constitution laws, culture, etc, and besides being hateful and incitement to violence and terrorism are in fact, subversive to our constitution and a direct threat to our unalienable rights and even to the continuation of our free nation.
The following is excerpted from: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/204505/does-quran-teach-hate-robert-spencer
The Qur'an teaches that Muslims must fight and kill unbelievers "wherever you overtake them" until "religion is Allah's," i.e. Islamic law rules all societies (2:190-193). They must fight unbelievers "until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah" (8:39). Muslims are to fight unbelievers and "prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows" (8:60).
Allah tells Muhammad to "fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination" (9:73). The followers of Muhammad should imitate him in this: "O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness" (9:123). For "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves" (48:29).
Muslims should not befriend non-Muslims, unless, as we have seen, it is to deceive them to save oneself from danger: "Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah, except when taking precaution against them in prudence" (3:28).
Allah says he will "cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve" (3:151). He tells his prophet: "[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip."
Among "those who have disbelieved" are the Christians, who have made themselves into disbelievers by worshipping Christ as God: "They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary'" (5:17; 5:72). In worshipping Christ, they have associated a partner with Allah, thereby becoming polytheists, and "the polytheists are unclean" (9:28). Both Jews and Christians have ascribed a son to Allah, for which Allah should destroy them: "The Jews say, 'Ezra is the son of Allah'; and the Christians say, 'The Messiah is the son of Allah.' That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?" (9:30).
Chief among those are the Jews. The Muslim holy book also contends that Allah transformed disobedient Jews into "apes, despised" (2:65; 7:166), and "apes and pigs" (5:60). It says that they're accursed for rejecting the Qur'an, which they should have recognized as confirming their own Scriptures: "And when there came to them a Book from Allah confirming that which was with them - although before they used to pray for victory against those who disbelieved - but [then] when there came to them that which they recognized, they disbelieved in it; so the curse of Allah will be upon the disbelievers" (2:89).
The Qur'an says that while Muslims are "the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind," the People of the Book (primarily Jews and Christians) are mostly "defiantly disobedient" (3:110). The Jews "have been put under humiliation [by Allah] wherever they are overtaken, except for a covenant from Allah and a rope from the Muslims" -- that is, except those who have accepted Islam or submitted to Muslim rule. "And they have drawn upon themselves anger from Allah and have been put under destitution. That is because they disbelieved in the verses of Allah and killed the prophets without right. That is because they disobeyed and [habitually] transgressed" (3:112). They killed the prophets because they disliked their messages: "Whenever there came to them a messenger with what their souls did not desire, a party [of messengers] they denied, and another party they killed" (5:70).
Not only have they disbelieved in revelations from Allah and killed the prophets, but they even dare to mock Allah himself: "And the Jews say, 'The hand of Allah is chained.' Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say." They "strive throughout the land [causing] corruption, and Allah does not like corrupters" (5:64).
Allah gave food laws to the Jews because of their "wrongdoing," and "for their averting from the way of Allah many [people]" (4:160), and by doing so, "repaid them for their injustice" (6:146). Some Jews are "avid listeners to falsehood" who "distort words beyond their [proper] usages." These are "the ones for whom Allah does not intend to purify their hearts," and they will be punished not just in hellfire but in this life as well: "For them in this world is disgrace, and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment" (5:41).
Jews dare to deny divine revelation, claiming that "Allah did not reveal to a human being anything," to which Muhammad is told to respond, "Who revealed the Scripture that Moses brought as light and guidance to the people? You [Jews] make it into pages, disclosing [some of] it and concealing much" (6:91).
In light of all this, it is understandable that Muslims should not get close to such people: "O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people" (5:51). What's more, the Jews are "the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers" (5:82).
While Muslims are the "best of people" (3:110), "they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures" (98:6). They are "like livestock" (7:179). "Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are those who have disbelieved, and they will not [ever] believe" (8:55).
Well, consider if you will Egypt, and Indonesia.
Both are Muslim with a substantial portion of the world’s population of Muslims but are not radical. As a matter of fact, in Egypt, the radicals were deposed and things seem to be getting along well.
In historical context, the current radicals can be viewed as a counter reformation to the evolution of Islam to cope with modern life in the crowded cities of the world that has taken place in say the last hundred years.
That is not to excuse the radicals that have no checks on the bounds of their rage
C’mon, Jim, you can’t be serious about quoting Koranic scripture to describe Islamic dogma. /brain-addled multi-cultural mode
Read the article...it’s in this.....plus some of the Paris news sites.
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Obama wearing ring even before marriage.
Bill Warner, PhD: Why We Are Afraid: 1400 Years of Fear - English No Sub-titles
The video of the entire event is here but I couldn’t tell you where that particular comment from Luntz is.
http://presidentialfamilyforum.com/watch/
There are no “moderate” Muslims. There are only Muslims who take Islam seriously, and those who don’t (non-believing Muslim-only-by-ethnicity).
But even with the non-practicing Muslim, there is always the danger that he might decide to go back to Allah.
I’m done with the debate and ready to kill em all and let God sort them out, we did it to the Japanese and the Germans and that is how we stopped their aggression then, and that is how we should do it again....kill until they give up their nonsense.
The crusades are on again.
We need to kick the Muzzies out and shut down the mosques and get on with life as a Judeo Christian nation. Anybody who does not like it can move to France. :-)
The problem with the "inner struggle" interpretation, is that it is based on a hadith (quote from Mohammad) which Sunni scholars unanimously reject as bogus.
Indeed, as while true Christians deplore and distance themselves from serious and often bloody aberrations of Christian faith, we see little voice from "moderate Islam" against the sppsdly aberrant bloody Islam. For the reality is that due to the many exhortations to religious violence and bloody Jihad, "radical Islam" can well defend itself as being "true Islam," esp. in the light of Muhammad's application, against its moderate counterpart, if such would even contend with them on this.
At best the lack of context in the Qur'an does not provide what is needed to relegate such to merely self-defense, such as protecting innocent life, while at worse it supports ISIS type conquests, which is more in line with post-Meccan Muhammad ("the more peaceful, tolerant verses in the Qur'an tend to be earlier, reflecting Muhammad's move from leader of a peaceful minority sect at Mecca to political supremacy and conquest at Medina."ThirdWay, Sep 2005, p.11) .
After his migration to Medina, Muhammad's attitude towards Christians and Jews changed. Norman Stillman states:[8]
During this fateful time, fraught with tension after the Hijra [migration to Medina], when Muhammad encountered contradiction, ridicule and rejection from the Jewish scholars in Medina, he came to adopt a radically more negative view of the people of the Book who had received earlier scriptures. -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_in_Medina
The Qur'an both contradicts the earlier revelation it claims to be an extension of, and also is in contrast with the Bible, as regards the latter's extensive historical narratives and detailed legislative promulgations, and theological teachings, which provide contexts for wars as well as a clear theology which clearly does not support either the church ruling over those without, or using the sword of men to silence its theological enemies, or to execute retaliation against its physical persecutors.
Yet the state can indirectly support religion, and in fact in the US esp. it cannot help but do so as its moral laws and ideology reflected both the religious beliefs of its Founders overall, and of the people.
But such cannot mandate belief, as per theocracies and especially based upon the premise that its leaders or supreme court cannot err, in cultic faiths and "political religion.
But as "our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people,"( John Adams) and is subject to interpretation by courts, then as the people largely forsake the God of the Bible and the Spirit of Christ, then they elect mislead and deceptive souls. who in turn appoint judges who do not interpret Constitution according to what the Founder's meant, but after their own heart.
Government by the people, for the devil. Let the righteous arise instead.
They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off. (Hosea 8:4)
I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing. (Hosea 8:12)
Thank you caww on both links
After awhile I went exploring the twitter world and found some pics and such, and peeps complaining about how they ransacked the mosque and knocked their books on the floor, and would they do that to a church of the kkk.
They even claim that those Paris terrorists rarely or never even attended a mosque, they were just regular criminals and that the mastermind of the Paris attack had attended “Catholic school”.
That’s the mentality these days.
I call it “perpitudical victim-hood” ... yea I made that word up. It’s a combo of perpetrator and attitude.
https://twitter.com/search?q=paris%20raid%20mosque&src=typd
Thanks again caww
Glad you posted that, Jim. I believe that also.
Muslims who claim to be peaceful are collaborators. They would never turn a terrorist in or speak against one.
I have been abused, called a racist, raked over the coals by liberals on Facebook because I neither like nor trust so-called peaceful Muslims.
Peaceful Muslims : a mythical race of beings believed in and worshipped by liberals.
In WWII we called them ‘fellow travelers.’
There is no such thing as a “moderate” muslim. There are only muslims. If you do not believe it read their book. It tells them what to do regarding infidels. If they do not do it, they, themselves, can be killed as apostates.
“just another Jihadists using a Mosque and it’s members to recruit and fund Jihadists”
- exactly!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.