Michael Medved Blames Islam

Michael Medved talkshow (radio) | now 01 Oct 2001 | Michael Medved Show (radio)

[RnMomof7]

Islam is approximately 600 years younger than Christianity and this makes all the difference. So, if we want compare religions let us compare apples vs apples, let us compare Christianity circa 1400 with modern Islam

600 years ago there were no nukes,or planes...or electricity for Petes skes..it is time for them to grow up!

Fox had a piece on showing them "training" the young boys for war and death for allah...then their parents will get $15,000 for their death..

So I dont want to hear one more word about the "poor little boys " getting killed by Jewish soldiers..their "babies" were screaming death and hatred..

If you live by the sword you die by it

[Non-Sequitur]

"...unlike Moses and Jesus, Mohammed was a warrior. And said Allah is a warrior God.

But Moses was a warrior. Hasn't Mr. Medved read Numbers in the Old Testament? Moses led the Israelites against the Canaanites, the Amorites, the Bashanites, the Midianties, and all the rest. That makes the God of Moses a warrior God as well since he is given credit for delivering the enemies of Israel over for defeat.

[KC_Conspirator]

Every point by Medved makes total sense. He is qouting the Koran while making his points and no one yet has proven otherwise. This is an exercise in looking for an answer and proof that Islam is a peaceful religion. So far nobody has made a good case.

[tessalu]

I will tell you that the god of Muhammed was not they God of the Bible. You really do not have to study too far to find that out. A transcript of God's character is shown in the 10 commandment law, and the allah of the Quran does not stand by that at all. The God of the bible tells us what sin is, and allah has different rules to live by, different sins. The worst sin in Islam is supposed to be the belief in polytheism, which includes the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. In other words, it is better to be a murderer than a believer in Jesus Christ as the Gon of God. Allah claims that Satan is made of smokeless fire, and the bible tells us that Lucifer is a fallen angel, who rebelled, and was kicked out of heaven with one third of the angels. The Quran teaches that allah told the angels to bow to Adam, and that all did, and only Shaitan (Lucifer) refused. The bible teaches that angels are higher than mankind, not lower, and they do not bow to any man. Jesus teaches that in heaven, there is no marriage, and that we shall be as the angels. The angels are created beings, and they do not give birth, and they are neither male nor female. The angels in the bible were given male names, non the less. Jesus teaches love, to even love your enemies, and this is foreign to allah. Allah calls his followers "slaves" and God of the bible calls men his "children" who follow him, and he tells them they are heirs to his kingdom. The bible teaches that Jesus will come again, and Islam teaches that too. But Islam says that Jesus never did die at all, and that God took him to heaven where he is now, but Islam says that Jesus will come, then follow muhammed, then live 40 years and then die. Allah teaches that every man in Paradise will have at least 72 virgins and lots of slaves. The bible has no Slaves in heaven, only God's children. Allah teaches that men will have sex in heaven with all those virgins. It is said that the worst muslim will have at least 72 of them. I have not meant to teach or preach, only to bring out some points of differences. The most telling thing to me was that Islam believes that Jesus never died, never shed his blood for sin. We were bought with a price, our sins are covered if we repent. As far as the Jewish belief goes, Muhammed changed much of history to his liking, even though he was not there, and claims it was Ishmael, whom Abraham was going to sacrifice instead of Issac. Muhammed said that this occurred at Mecca, instead of Mt. Moriah, which is the Temple Mount, that the bible speaks about. Ok, this is enough if you want to check it out, and I do say that allah is not any God that I ever knew or hope to know. I find the Quran to be somewhat boring, and aside from that, there are hadiths, which were supposedly written by people who knew Muhammed many, many years after his death. Even scholars say that there are true hadiths and false hadiths, so no wonder there is so much misunderstandings in Islam. I am a little bit dismayed when some who know nothing about Islam tries to tell us it is a peaceful religion, when they know absolutely nothing about it. It is a good idea to check things out for yourself, and I do suggest this, and to know the truth. The truth sets us free.

[Teacher317]

Looks like you're building a really good profile there, but you forgot Arab, non-citizen, and 5'6" - 6'0". Now that we know what to look for, do we call it racial profiling?

[A. Pole]

Bump

[Lent]

And this was my response to Locke:

And you need to quit white-washing the Koran and understand the early and late suras. Moreover, the main problem with Islam is with its hermeneutics. The Koran and Mohammed's words are not conditioned. This theology of the incontrovertible Koran with a medieval hermeneutics has been a pervasive and unrelenting problem with Islam:

EARLY ATTITUDES: Muhammad and the Koran

The Koran has been divided into early and late Suras, the Meccan and Medinan Suras respectively. Most of the tolerant sentiments of Muhammad are to be found in the early, Meccan Suras:

cix "Recite: O Unbelievers, I worship not what you worship, and you do not worship what I worship. I shall never worship what you worship. Neither will you worship what I worship. To you your religion, to me my religion l.45 "We well know what the infidels say: but you are not to compel them."

xliii. 88,89 "And [Muhammad] says, "O Lord, these are people who do not believe." Bear with them and wish them 'Peace '. In the end they shall know their folly."

The exceptions are to be found in Sura ii, which is usually considered Medinan i.e. late:

ii.256 "There is no compulsion in religion";

ii.62"Those who believe [i.e.Muslims] and those who follow the Jewish scriptures, and the Christians and the Sabians, and who believe in God and the Last Day and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve."

Unfortunately, as he gained in confidence and increased his political and military power, Muhammad turned from being a "persuader to being a legislator and warrior, dictating obedience." The Medinan chapters such as Suras ix, v, iv, xxii, xlvii, viii, and ii reveal Muhammad at his most belligerent, dogmatic and intolerant.

Muslim theologians are unanimous in declaring that no religious toleration was extended to the idolaters of Arabia at the time of Muhammad. The only choice given them was death or the acceptance of Islam. This total intolerance never seems to be taken into consideration by the apologists of Islam when they lay claims to Islamic tolerance. Unbelievers in general are shown no mercy in the Koran which is full of lurid descriptions of the punishments awaiting them. xxii.9:"As for the unbelievers for them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skins shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron- rods. The Koran also enjoins all Muslims to fight and kill non-believers: xlvii.4: "When you meet the unbelievers, strike off their heads; then when you have made wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives."

They are also accused of worshipping Jesus as the son of God, and like the Jews, they have been led astray and must be brought back to the true religion, that is, Islam.

According to the Koran, Jews have intense hatred of all true Muslims, and as a punishments for their sins, some of them had, in the past, been changed into apes and swine (Sura v.63), and others will have their hands tied to their necks and be cast into the Fire on Judgment day. The attitude enjoined upon the Muslims towards the Jews can only be described as anti-Semitic, and certainly was not conducive to a better understanding, tolerance or co- existence.

v.51: Believers, do not take Jews or Christians as friends They are but one another's friends. If anyone of you takes them for his friends, then he is surely one of them. God will not guide evil-doers."

v.56_64: O Believers, do not take as your friends the infidels or those who received the Scriptures before you [Jews and Christians] and who scoff and jest at your religion, but fear God if you are believers. Nor those who when you call them to prayer, make it an object of mirth and derision This is only because they are a people who do not understand. Say: "People of the Book: isn't it true that you hate us simply because we believe in God, and in what He has sent down to us, and in what He has revealed to others before; and because most of you are evil doers?" "Why don't their rabbis and doctors of lax forbid them from uttering sinful words and eating unlawful food? Evil indeed are their works. "The hand of God is chained up", claim the Jews. Their own hands shall be chained up -- and they shall be cursed for saying such a thing."

Jews are often accused, in the Koran, of perverting the scriptures, and holding doctrines they never held:

ix.29,30:"Declare war upon those to whom the Scriptures were revealed but believe neither in God nor the Last Day, and who do not forbid that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who refuse to acknowledge the true religion [Islam] until they pay the poll-tax without reservation and are totally subjugated. "The Jews claim that Ezra is a son of God, and the Christians say, "the Messiah is a son of God. "Those are their claims which do indeed resemble the sayings of the Infidels of Old. May God do battle with them! How they are deluded!"

And they deserve fully any punishment they get:

ii.61:"Wretchedness and baseness were stamped upon them [That is the Jews] and they drew on themselves the wrath of God. This was because they [the Jews] disbelieved the signs of God and slew the Prophets unjustly, and because they rebelled and transgressed."

iv.160,161: Because of the wickedness of certain Jews, and because they turn many from the way of God, We have forbidden them good and wholesome foods which were formerly allowed them; and because they have taken to usury, though they were forbidden it; and have cheated others of their possessions, We have prepared a grievous punishment for the Infidels amongst them."

Such are some of the sentiments expressed in the Koran, which remains for all Muslims, and not just" fundamentalists", the uncreated word of God Himself. It is valid for all times and places, its ideas are, according to all Muslims, absolutely true and beyond any criticism. I have already described the treatment of the Jews by Muhammad, whose behaviour is certainly not above reproach. The cold-blooded extermination of the Banu Qurayza (between 600 and 900 men), the expulsion of the Nadir and their later massacre (something often overlooked in the history books) are not signs of magnanimity or compassion. His treatment of the Jews of the oasis of Khaybar served "as a model for the treaties granted by the Arab conquerors to the conquered peoples in territories beyond Arabia. "Muhammad attacked the oasis in 628, had one of the leaders tortured to find the hidden treasures of the tribe, and then when the Jews surrendered, agreed to let them continue cultivating their oasis only if they gave him half their produce. Muhammad also reserved the right to cancel the treaty and expel the Jews whenever he liked. This treaty or agreement was called a DHIMMA, and those who accepted it were known as DHIMMIS.

All non-Muslims who accepted Muslim supremacy and agreed to pay a tribute, in return for "Muslim protection", will be referred to as dhimmis henceforth. The second caliph Umar later expelled the Jews and the Christians from the Hijaz (containing the holy cities of Mecca and Medina) in 640, referring to the dhimma of Khaybar. He is said to have quoted the Prophet on the right to cancel any pact he wished, and the Prophet's famous saying: "Two religions shall not remain together in the peninsula of the Arabs. "To this day, the establishment of any other religion in Saudi Arabia is forbidden.

JIHAD – PAST AND PRESENT.

The word Jihad comes from the Arabic word jahada, which as Lane in his celebrated Arabic –English Lexicon points out, means "He strove, laboured, or toiled; exerted himself or his power or efforts or endeavours or ability" Jihad, continues Lane, "properly signifies using or exerting, one's utmost power, efforts, endeavours, or ability, in contending with an object of disapprobation, and this of three kinds, namely, a visible enemy, the devil, and one’s self; all of which are included in the Koran sura xxii.78. …Jihad came to be used by the Muslims to signify generally he fought, warred, or waged war, against unbelievers and the like ."[1] [Emphasis added]

As Tyan in his article in the EI² (Djihad, I.538 ff.) makes clear, "in law, according to general doctrine and in historical tradition, the jihad consists of military action with the object of the expansion of Islam and, if need be, of its defence"[emphasis added]. Tyan expressly rules out the thesis of a wholly apologetic character, according to which Islam relies on peaceful expansion, and that jihad is only authorized in cases of self-defence. This thesis ignores entirely the doctrines developed by Muslim theologians, the historical tradition, as well as texts of the Koran and sunna. Another scholar, Rudolph Peters [2], also emphasizes that Classical Muslim Koran interpretation regarded the Sword Verses of the Koran (see below), with uncoditional command to fight the unbelievers,as having abrogated all previous verses concerning relations with non-Muslims.

Koran VIII.60

Here are some hadith from Bukhari, Muslim and other traditionists:

Bukhari [3] LI.1: "Verily Allah has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for theirs (in return) is Paradise.They fight in His cause, so they kill (others) and are killed…"[using forms of the verb " qatala" = to kill]

Bukhari:[4] LI.2 "Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah’s Messenger saying, "The example of a Mujahid in Allah’s cause – and Allah knows better who really strives in His cause – is like a person who fasts and prays continuously.Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Cause into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty."

Bukhari: [5] LI. 6 Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, ‘Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah …would wish to come back to this world even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom,would like to come back to the world and get killed again."

Bukhari: [6] LI.22.Narrated Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba:: Our Prophet told us about the message of our Lord that "… whoever amongst us is killed will go to Paradise"

‘Umar asked the Prophet, ‘Is it not true that our men who are killed will go to Paradise and theirs will go to the fire?’ The Prophet said ‘Yes ’.

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Abi Aufa, Allah’s Messenger said, "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords." [meaning « under the protection of swords."]

Bukhari: [7] Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Messenger said, "Allah welcomes two men with a smile; one whom kills the other and both of them enter Paradise. One fights in Allah’s cause and gets killed. Later on Allah forgives the killer who also gets martyred (in Allah’s cause)."

Bukhari [8]: Narrated as-Sa’b bin Jaththama: The Prophet passed by me at a place called al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They are from them." [i.e. the women and children are also pagans, hence it is permissible to kill them. However there are other hadith which do forbid the killing of women and children.]

Even a cursory glance at the chapter on Jihad (Vol.IV, pp. 34-199) in Bukhari is enough to show that real battles, deaths, wounds, horses, swords, arrows, prisoners of war, looting, booty, burning and destruction are being referred to. Hadith after hadith recount in horrible details as to how the Jihad against infidels was to be carried out; no they do not talk of metaphorical battles, or allegorical, spiritual struggles, but bloody war.

Sunan Abu Dawud,[9] Kitab al –Jihad:

(2632) Ayas b.Salamah reported on the authority of his father: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed Abu Bakr our commander and we fought with some people who were polytheists, and we attacked them at night, killing them. Our war-cry that night was ‘ put to death; put to death’. Salamah said: "I killed that night with my hand polytheists belonging to seven houses."

(2664) Samurah b. Jundub reported the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying: « Kill the old men who are polytheists, but spare their children."[10]

Sahih Muslim [11] (4292); The Messenger of Allah made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water.He killed those who fought and imprisoned the others.

Sahih Muslim: (4294) If they (the enemy) refuse to accept Islam, demand from the Jizya; If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.

Averroes [12]: "Scholars agree that jihad is collective not a personal obligation.... According to the majority of scholars, the compulsory nature of the jihad is founded on sura 2:216 ‘Prescribed for you is fighting, though it be hateful to you.’ … Scholars agree that al polytheists should be fought. This is founded on sura 8:39 ‘Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is God’s entirely."

SECULARISLAM

[HoustonKevin]

*An adulterer is punished by 100 lashes. Surah 24:2

Billy Boy! ...that will be 1,000,000,000,000 Lashes!!

[bluester]

So Muslims are evil, hey Pericles? You actually agree with this guy?. I think Hitler also said that Jews were bad, and such statements remind me much about that mentality.

Gee, and I thought this (and all the rest related to the Balkans) had nothing to do with hating Muslims, but learning the truth. How naive was I?

It's those evil, wicked, satanist, anti-Christian Muslims that are the only problem for our great civilisation. Uhm, I don't think so Pericles, I am not about to join these kind of witch-hunting. I can do better then that.

[Teacher317]

I had the same conversation about a week ago. Maybe world religious movements have their own 'maturation' period. The Crusades, the Inquisition (nobody expected it! *grin*), and the slaughter and enslavement of the New World's inhabitants were all done on the name of Christ, about 1000-1400 years into Christianity's existence. Could this be the beginning of Islam's rapid expansion, followed (hopefully) by a transformation to a more sedate, peaceful and civilized orthodoxy?

Could someone better informed than I please let us know if Judaism and Buddhism had similarly bloody histories after about 1000-1400 years, before a large growth in the number of converts/believers?

[A. Pole]

So, if we want compare religions let us compare apples vs apples, let us compare Christianity circa 1400 with modern Islam.

That is a nonsense. Islam has different content. Just using your approach:
Compare the first 300 years of Islam with first 300 years of Christianity. DO you see now?

[Pericles]

You actually agree with this guy?. Which guy? Muhammed? It is from his own hairy lips.

[Malcolm]

I agree with Medved. It is from the Islamic culture that these ignorant hicks, full of hatred, courtesy of the false religion they adhere to, is the reason for the terrorism, not what we have done, the West has done, or what Israel has done. We might need to do what we did in the Cold War; containment, but with a twist: no more émigrés from the Islamic world. It's discriminatory, but that culture can not be trusted. If another terrorist incident happens, believe me, I'll me called one of the liberals regarding my position on this issue. More incidents would result in massive persecution against anyone with dark skin, except blacks. There would be lynchings and similar happenings all over the US. So you might say, we'd be saving lives by not letting them over here in the first place. Maybe, to be fair about it, we could just cut off immigration altogether. We're already the 3rd largest nation in the world, with only India and China ahead of us, so it's not like an underpopulated nation is being selfish about it. Plus, you leftist Muslim sympathizers out there have not considered what may be coming; a suitcase nuke in a big city near you. We can't live in unreality any more; the animals of this world are upon us, and our way of life will CERTAINLY be extinguished, if results-oriented measures are not implemented post-haste. I would consider getting right with G-d as well. Since now, all of our lives are constantly at risk, you better be prepared for the worst......

[Pericles]

Hey Teacher there is a difference. Christ never said kill the heathens or conquer this city by arms (if Christians did they sinned). Muhammed did say these things!

Read it here written by Muhammed for Muslims.

[xm177e2]

Heard nationally on over 140 stations.

But for how long?

[Ramius]

If, then, these fanatics are spreading a heresy within Islam... why are Muslims not rooting out the heretics themselves?

If it is in fact an apostasy I would think that those most fervently attacking it would be... Muslims.

[rebdov]

At last someone tells the truth.

[sheik yerbouty]

It's sort of like Hamslamistan.

[Irene Adler]

"Could someone better informed than I please let us know if Judaism and Buddhism had similarly bloody histories after about 1000-1400 years, before a large growth in the number of converts/believers?"

I can speak only for Buddhism which I have been studying recently. My best understanding is that has no bloody history or history of being spread by force or conquest at all. Historically, it has been remarkably peaceful.