Posted on 11/17/2010 8:46:23 PM PST by ventanax5
Since September 11 we have asked the question: "What is the real Islam?" The answers from Muslims and Westerners are contradictory and make us confused.
There is one way to gain clarity and surety about Islam—our best rational approach is the scientific method.
Let us start with the fact that the complete doctrine of Islam is found in three texts: Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (stories and anecdotes about Mohammed)—the Islamic Trilogy.
The Koran is confusing as it is arranged, but it can be made straightforward by scientific analysis.
The first step is to put the verses in the right time order, collect and categorize all of the similar stories. It is at this point that the missing parts, or holes, in the document become apparent. The life of Mohammed fills in and explains all the gaps and all the confusion falls away. Mohammed is the key to the Koran and Islam.
The doctrine breaks down in time into Mohammed in Mecca (the early part) and Mohammed in Medina (the later part). In essence, there are two Korans, one written in Mecca and the second Koran written in Medina.
(Excerpt) Read more at newenglishreview.org ...
There is one way to gain clarity and surety about Islam—our best rational approach is the scientific method.
Let us start with the fact that the complete doctrine of Islam is found in three texts: Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (stories and anecdotes about Mohammed)—the Islamic Trilogy.
The Koran is confusing as it is arranged, but it can be made straightforward by scientific analysis.
The first step is to put the verses in the right time order, collect and categorize all of the similar stories. It is at this point that the missing parts, or holes, in the document become apparent. The life of Mohammed fills in and explains all the gaps and all the confusion falls away. Mohammed is the key to the Koran and Islam.
The doctrine breaks down in time into Mohammed in Mecca (the early part) and Mohammed in Medina (the later part). In essence, there are two Korans, one written in Mecca and the second Koran written in Medina.
The two Korans are the first grand division of Islamic doctrine.
What is intriguing is that the two Korans include contradictions. "You have your religion and I have mine" 109:1 is a far cry from "I shall cast terror in the hearts of the kafirs. Strike off their heads…" 8:12. The Koran gives a way to solve these contradictions—the later verse is "better" than the earlier verse. But the earlier verse is still true. All the verses from the Koran are true because they are the words of Allah.
The Koran defines an Islamic logic that is dualistic. Two things which contradict each other can both be true. In a unitary, scientific logic, if two things contradict each other, then at least one of them is false. Not so in dualistic logic.
All of the doctrine refers to two classes of people—Muslims and non-Muslims, kafirs. The doctrine that applies to kafirs is political in nature and is rarely neutral or positive. The part of the doctrine that applies to Muslims is cultural, legal, and religious.
The second grand division of Islamic doctrine is into religious Islam and political Islam.
It is surprising how much of the doctrine is political. Approximately 67% of the Meccan Koran and 51% of the Medinan Koran is political. About 75% of the Sira is about what was done to the kafir. Roughly 20% of the Hadith is about jihad, a political act.
Even the concept of Hell is political, not religious. There are 146 parts of the Koran that refer to Hell. Only 4% of the people in Islamic Hell are there for moral reasons, such as murder, theft or greed. In 96% of the cases the person is in Hell because they did not agree with Mohammed. This is a political charge. In short, Islamic Hell is primarily a political prison.
In summary, Islam is an extremely political doctrine. It has to be. Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years and garnered 150 followers. Then in Medina, he turned to politics and jihad and became the first ruler of all Arabia. When he died, he did not have a single enemy left to speak or act against him, a very political result.
The Koran says in 14 verses that a Muslim is not and cannot be the friend of the kafir. This is pure dualism. The dualism of the Koran has no universal statements about humanity. The entire world is divided between Islam and the kafirs. The only statement about humanity as a whole is that all humanity must submit to Islam.
Ethics are the membrane between religion and politics. Two sets of ethics are laid out in the Trilogy. One set is for Muslims and the other set is for the kafirs. Examples: a Muslim should not steal from another Muslim, a Muslim should not kill another Muslim, a Muslim should not cheat a Muslim.
The kafir can be treated in one of two ways. They can be treated well or they can be robbed, killed, or cheated if it advances Islam. On more than one occasion Mohammed said to deceive the kafir. Jihad as a political method killed, robbed and enslaved the kafirs. This is a dualistic ethical system.
Islamic dualism is hidden by religion. The "good" verses of the Meccan Koran cover the verses of jihad in the Medinan Koran. Thus religious Islam shields political Islam from examination.
Scientific analysis shows us that there is a political Islam as well as a religious Islam. To argue about religion is fruitless, but we can talk about politics. We need to discuss political Islam, a system of ethical and political dualism.
That’s one of the most succinct descriptions of islam (ILC) I’ve read, excellent post! Bookmark
Also, from the same author....the Koran is only 14% of the Trilogy of Islam. The Hadith is 60% and the Siras are 26%. By ignoring the existence of 86% of Islamic Doctrine, by focusing in the most cursory manner on the Koran alone, leads to the same ignorance and dangerous lack of knowledge that focusing on Al-Qaeda alone engenders, thus avoiding the danger of the Muslim Brotherhood, 100 times the size of Al-Qaeda and thoroughly infiltrated in the West, in particular, the United States.
BTW, may I ask if anyone has ever seen anything which indicates that the Soros new world order types have a solution for defeating the Islam’s world order system? It appears that we are in the midst of competing world order drives but the Soros version is blind to the Islamic lust for control of thw hole world. Do ya suppose both are sourced in the same demon?
I’ve long decried the suicidal policy of the United States of allowing children > adolescents > adults that have been taught their entire lives that we are their sworn enemies/kufir/Great Satan. “We” (our politically correct/democrat/liberal/progressive/socialist/communist/Marxist enemies in the United States government) are welcoming our sworn enemies into our beloved country with open arms. Sickening is the kindest word I have for it.
A blogger noted the history of Communism with Islam back to 1922. Also, the Nazis were linked to the hip with Islam from the thirties...a la the Muslim Brotherhoods Al-Banna and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
http://galliawatch.blogspot.com/2009/12/islam-and-left-make-common-cause.html#links
Friday, December 25, 2009
Islam and the Left Make Common Cause
Sometimes readers express their confusion over this unlikely and inexplicable new collaboration. We saw it in action during the Gaza conflict. All over Europe, Islam marched arm in arm with Communists, Socialists, Greens, Feminists and homosexuals, protesting (at best), or (at worst) committing acts of extreme violence directed at Israel, Jews, the United States, and the West. All over Europe dhimmi governments and dhimmi media tried to downplay this violence in which police were targeted, innocent bystanders caught up in the melées injured, property destroyed, cars burnt, and so on. How did an extremely fanatical religion find allies in forces that have been fundamentally and vociferously atheistic in the past? An article posted at Sultan Knish provides some clues:
(...) To understand just how far back this goes, consider this defense of Pan-Islamism by the Chairman of the Communist Party of Indonesia in 1922:
“But now one must first understand what the word Pan-Islamism really means. Once, it had a historical significance and meant that Islam must conquer the whole world, sword in hand, and that this must take place under the leadership of the Caliph, and the Caliph must be of Arabian origin. About 400 years after the death of Mohammed the Muslims split into three great states and thus the Holy War lost its significance for the entire Muslim world...
So Pan-Islamism no longer has its original meaning, but now has in practice an entirely different meaning. Today, Pan-Islamism signifies the national liberation struggle, because for the Muslims Islam is everything: not only religion, but also the state, the economy, food, and everything else. And so Pan-Islamism now means the brotherhood of all Muslim peoples, and the liberation struggle not only of the Arab but also of the Indian, the Javanese and all the oppressed Muslim peoples. This brotherhood means the practical liberation struggle not only against Dutch but also against English, French and Italian capitalism, therefore against world capitalism as a whole. That is what Pan-Islamism now means in Indonesia among the oppressed colonial peoples, according to their secret propaganda – the liberation struggle against the different imperialist powers of the world.
This is a new task for us. Just as we want to support the national struggle, we also want to support the liberation struggle of the very combative, very active 250 million Muslims living under the imperialist powers. Therefore I ask once again: Should we support Pan-Islamism, in this sense?”
The speech in question may date back to 1922 but its sentiments are very modern and commonplace among liberals in the West today. Their view is that Islamism is a people’s liberation struggle against Western imperialism and capitalism because it serves as a common bridge between Islam and the Left today in 2009, just as it did then in 1922.
This reinterpretation of Islamism as an expression of economic and political discontent today tends to be described under labels such as resistance to Globalization or to corrupt Western “puppet regimes”, but it is in fact a carbon copy of the Soviet approach to Pan-Islamism. This ideological approach enables the left to co-opt Islam in the struggle against Western hegemony. Meanwhile Islamists have long since learned to put forward economic and political grievances in order to make common cause with the left.
Islam uses whatever tool or means available to conquer non-believers: “the enemy of my enemy is friend”.
That means Nazism and Communism, even Progressives and Liberal Democrats, are tools to be used and eventually subsumed, as Muslims know in the end all unbelievers will have to submit to Allah.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
The more I learn about Islam and Arabs, the more my eyes open.
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.