By Dallas M. Roark, Ph.D.
I received this email from Rajib H. who wrote the following letter to me. One of the problems in the letter is quoting a verse in the Old Testament without any context. Someone has said something like quoting a verse out of context is a pretext for mis-understanding. So it is here. Surely the death of anyone anywhere who is not an evil person is a sad thought. For evil people there is little remorse over their demise. Life is a gift of Yahweh and this life is to be respected. Murder of innocent people is an insult to Yahweh who made humans in his image. So let’s read the email and see what can be said about it.
From: Rajib H. (rajib_h…@yahoo.com)
Greeting to brothers and sisters, i think that you should know who started jihad, massacared, genocide. so that here are a list of biblical verses who deal with counter intiutiveness.
Joshua 11:10-11, 6:21, 10:25-28
Judges 1:17, 3:28-29
All these things has orderd by the God of the bible to make massacared and genocide on innocent earliest dwellers with the strict order to kill every man, women and even childrens. Tesfaye you may see these veres and say to me as many christians does by saying '' this was not about religion but this was about territory(land) unlike you muslims do'' But the truth is just look at the following verses which shows these killings (massacards) has been done for the sake of religions or faith not for territory(land).
Exodus 32:27-29, 22:19-20
Dear Rajib H.
You are claiming that jihad began in the Old Testament. I suppose that the first thing we must define is jihad itself. What is jihad? The term is not in the Old Testament. However, it is found in the Muslim culture. The concept of fighting is an important idea in the Qur’an. Check the following:
“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.” (8:39 Hilali-Khan translation, also in the following quotations)
“It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.” (8:67)
“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (9:29)
“It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) hate (it).” (9:33)
“Jihad (holy fighting in Allah's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.” (2:216)
“So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allah to continue in carrying out Jihad against the disbelievers till they embrace Islam (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost,” (47:4)
Mohammed was the model of jihad participating in a number of battles and planning others.
The respected biographer, Muhammad bin Ishaq, one of Islam’s greatest scholars wrote about Mohammed’s call to jihad and the battles he planned and fought. (The Life of Mohammed, by Mohammed bin Ishaq, trans. A. Guillaume, Oxford University Press, 1967, pp. 281-490)
The same prescription is given in the traditions about Mohammed: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/002.sbt.html
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."... (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25)
What are the effects of this teaching in the Qur’an and the hadiths? Under the leaders who succeeded Mohammed the Muslims continued what Mohammed had done in
Jihad has been practiced against people of all kinds of nations, all kinds of belief system, and for 1400 years. It is still going on in modern times against anyone who is a non-Muslim.
Hopefully, we now know what Jihad is in the Muslim sense.
Now we must turn to the story of the Bible to see if there is any kind of jihad there. You claim that it is not about land, but about religion. If you will read the verses below you will discover that it is about land in the very beginning of the story of Abraham in which Yahweh promised the land. In your statement, you have overlooked the history of the Old Testament. You must read the whole story. Let’s begin with Abraham and what Yahweh promised him. We will have to look at the whole chapter:
After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision: "Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great." But Abram said, "O Lord GOD, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of
If you care to think about this passage you can find a background to the passages you quoted without regard to any context. Abraham’s offspring would be in Egypt all that time as pilgrims then would be enslaved before being liberated by Yahweh. All this time would amount to over 400 years. This is the patience of Yahweh concerning people who sinned greatly against his holiness. A variety of idolatries were practiced, even human sacrifice to Molech, temple prostitution in the worship of Baal, and many other sins.
Does 400 years seem like impatience? There seems to come a time when judgment must fall and Yahweh is the one doing the judgment. In the case of
“When my angel goes before you and brings you to the Amorites and the Hittites and the Perizzites and the Canaanites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, and I blot them out, you shall not bow down to their gods nor serve them, nor do as they do, but you shall utterly overthrow them and break their pillars in pieces. You shall serve the LORD your God, and he will bless your bread and your water, and I will take sickness away from among you.” (Exodus 23:23-25)
If you care to consider these verses, there are limitations on the judgment. It is restricted to the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites and Jebusites. No one else!! There is no reference to
Once this judgment was passed there are many commands about welcoming and protecting the sojourner in their midst.
Before the events of judgment on these groups we have the words in Exodus,
“... but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates.” (Exodus 20:10)
“You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the
These were non-Jews and there was respect for them.
Part of the reason for the judgment upon Jews centuries later announced by the prophet Ezekiel was,
“The people of the land have practiced extortion and committed robbery. They have oppressed the poor and needy, and have extorted from the sojourner without justice.” (Ezekiel 22:29)
The last prophet in the Old Testament declares God’s word,
“Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the LORD of hosts.” (Malachi 3:5)
One more perspective is important for seeing what happens in the Old Testament concerning judgment. Here the issue is that after 400 years
“Yet the LORD warned
The view of history is expressed also in the following passage:
“So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day.” (1 Chronicles 5:26)
Jeremiah, the prophet also declares God’s activity in judging
“
Not only would the Babylonians come as Yahweh’s judge on
“For thus says the LORD: Behold, I will make you a terror to yourself and to all your friends. They shall fall by the sword of their enemies while you look on. And I will give all
The warnings from Yahweh had been made repeatedly and the most sacred place in
“For I have set my face against this city for harm and not for good, declares the LORD: it shall be given into the hand of the king of
The punishment on Israel would last for 70 years in their captivity in the land of Babylon and then they would return to Israel. At the end of the period of time, the captive people would be free because
“Then after seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity, declares the LORD, making the land an everlasting waste.” (Jeremiah 25:12)
The punishment or visitation of its iniquity upon
No, I don’t think jihad began in the Old Testament. It began with Mohammed.
We should now look at the passages of Scripture that are used to suggest jihad in the Old Testament. The first is:
“... then Moses stood in the gate of the camp and said, "Who is on the LORD's side? Come to me." And all the sons of Levi gathered around him. And he said to them, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor.'” And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses. And that day about three thousand men of the people fell.” (Exodus 32:26-28)
What has gone on here? The word of Yahweh to Abraham was in the process of being fulfilled. After years of slavery in
These were direct insults to the mercy and grace of Yahweh. What ingratitude!! What thoughtlessness!! How warped were their reasons that they could know all this and turn against Yahweh. In light of this, the rebellious were dealt with. They were judged for their iniquity. There is no command to the Levites that they should pursue other nations to forcibly bring them under the rule of Yahweh. Neither has there been a command to the nation or people of
The second passage is:
“Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death. Whoever sacrifices to any god, other than the LORD alone, shall be devoted to destruction.” (Exodus 22:19-20)
First, this is a passage that relates to the life of
The third passage is:
“And Joshua turned back at that time and captured Hazor and struck its king with the sword, for Hazor formerly was the head of all those kingdoms. And they struck with the sword all who were in it, devoting them to destruction; there was none left that breathed. And he burned Hazor with fire. And all the cities of those kings, and all their kings, Joshua captured, and struck them with the edge of the sword, devoting them to destruction, just as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded. But none of the cities that stood on mounds did
This passage gives an example of Yahweh using one nation to bring judgment on the evil nation whose time had come. The same idea relates to
The fourth passage:
“And Joshua said to them, "Do not be afraid or dismayed; be strong and courageous. For thus the LORD will do to all your enemies against whom you fight." And afterward Joshua struck them and put them to death, and he hanged them on five trees. And they hung on the trees until evening. But at the time of the going down of the sun, Joshua commanded, and they took them down from the trees and threw them into the cave where they had hidden themselves, and they set large stones against the mouth of the cave, which remain to this very day. As for Makkedah, Joshua captured it on that day and struck it, and its king, with the edge of the sword. He devoted to destruction every person in it; he left none remaining. And he did to the king of Makkedah just as he had done to the king of Jericho.” (Joshua 10:25-28)
This passage fits into the same category of the one above and the comments related to it.
The fifth passage:
“Then they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword. But to the two men who had spied out the land, Joshua said, "Go into the prostitute's house and bring out from there the woman and all who belong to her, as you swore to her."” (Joshua 6:21-22)
Rajib listed only 6:21, but the context of the story is interesting in many ways. First, it was an act of Yahweh who brought down the walls. Joshua’s people only marched around the city for 7 days blowing the trumpet but it was Yahweh who brought down the walls. Second, it was again the people coming to re-claim the land promised to Abraham and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob. These were the people who were in
The sixth passage is:
“And
This passage still relates to the campaign to take possession of the land that Yahweh had given them.
The seventh passage is:
“And he said to them, "Follow after me, for the LORD has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand." So they went down after him and seized the fords of the
The book of judges has a theme of “each man did what was right in his own eyes,” and general deterioration of loyalty to Yahweh is described in the many chapters. The theme is repeated many times in which the people fall away, the judgment of Yahweh takes place allowing invaders to come and enslave them until they are desperate and cry out to Yahweh to deliver them. In this case, the Moabites had come and subjected the people for many years.
When they repented of their sins, Yahweh raised up a leader who brought deliverance and in this case they were fighting for their country again. The enemy was killed and they had rest and peace for 80 years before another falling away took place and the process was repeated.
In conclusion, the concept of jihad as the Muslim world views it does not exist in the Old Testament. The fulfillment of the promise to Abraham involved Yahweh’s judgment on the peoples there. Yahweh is still Lord of history!! To understand the Old or New Testament one must read the whole story.
Thanks for writing. If you have other questions I would try to answer them.
Blessings, Dallas
Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/roark/jihad_ot.html
IHS
Thursday, 11 April 2013
Is there Jihad in the Old Testament?
Wednesday, 10 April 2013
Bart Ehrman: A Hero for Islam?
Many Muslims adore the New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman because he is a former Christian who is now a critic of the New Testament. He has authored numerous books attacking the validity of the New Testament including Misquoting Jesus. In turn Ehrman’s claims have been challenged and addressed in subsequent articles and debates.1 Muslims often exploit Ehrman’s work and parade his anti-Christian rhetoric in videos and articles. But is Ehrman really a hero for Islam? Or does he hold to historical views that are detrimental to Islam?
The aim of this article is to do two things. 1. Show that Bart Ehrman grants four major and fundamental things concerning the life of Jesus and about Christianity that Islam denies. 2. To give reference material to those who are confronted with Muslims who appeal to Bart Ehrman as a hero for Islam. This article will demonstrate that many of Bart Ehrman’s writings are useful tools against Islam.
Topic 1: The Crucifixion of Jesus
The vast majority of Muslims rejects the Crucifixion of Christ because their Qur’an rejects this historical event. In the Qur’an we read:
And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. (Qur’an 4:157, Pickthall)
It is quite clear that this religion teaches its followers that Jesus’ crucifixion was just an act of deception on the part of Allah. The Qur’an teaches that Allah deceived everyone to think Jesus was crucified but that it didn’t actually happen historically speaking. This claim is very problematic and it flies in the face of 1st and 2nd century historical data. For this reason the supposed hero of Islam, Bart Ehrman rejects Islam’s position that Jesus wasn’t crucified and he has openly stated that he believes Jesus was crucified according to the available data. In his work ‘The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings,’ he states:
In any event, Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate.2
So it seems that the hero for Islam agrees with the Christians about Jesus being crucified. This is valuable information and is very useful to bring up to anyone who touts Ehrman as the hero of Islam.
Topic 2: Paul the Usurper or Real Apostle of Christ?
Many modern Muslims hate Paul because Paul clearly taught Christ’s divinity in his writings. Even though there is a strong case to be made that Paul was a true apostle according to the Qur’an and early Muslim sources (*), many Muslims do not hesitate to slander and even mock the Apostle Paul. Many Muslims claim that Paul was not a true apostle. They claim that he simply came in later and corrupted everything somehow.
However, Bart Ehrman does not share this radical belief. In fact Bart Ehrman defends Apostle Paul as an early reliable source of information for the life of Jesus. Ehrman contends that, based on the evidence, the Apostle Paul knew the original disciples of Jesus and became one of them.
In a radio interview the Infidel Guy challenged the notion that Jesus even existed and claimed that there is no real evidence for him existing. Ehrman, confused at the assertion because virtually no scholars hold this view, corrects the deceived radio host. They then debate and Ehrman states the following:
We have one author who actually knew Jesus’ relatives and knew his disciples…Paul….It’s not an embellishment that Paul met with James in
So what we have is Islam’s hero Bart Ehrman destroying modern Muslim belief about Apostle Paul. Ehrman, along with the majority of serious scholarship holds the view that Paul was a true disciple of Jesus Christ who met with the leaders of the early church shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion, not a usurper.
Topic 3: Jesus was buried & His Apostles Reported Visions
Muslims deny that Jesus was crucified. Islam teaches that Jesus was rescued from the cross by Allah and that someone was made to appear like Jesus on the cross. However the hero of Islam, Bart Ehrman, although he disputes the type of burial Jesus had, does concede that Jesus was most likely buried and that his disciples most likely did have visions where they believed they saw the risen Christ!
Dr. Ehrman remarks:
What I think we can say with some confidence is that Jesus actually did die, he probably was buried, and that some of his disciples (all of them? some of them?) claimed to have seen him alive afterward. Among those who made this claim, interestingly enough was Jesus’ own brother James, who came to believe in Jesus and soon thereafter became one of the principle leaders of the early Christian church.4
Since Islam denies that Jesus died and was buried one can logically assume that they deny that Jesus’ followers had multiple experiences in which they thought that they had seen the risen Christ. I am not aware of any Islamic text which states that the post resurrection appearances were delusions from Allah. However the supposed hero of Islam grants all of this based on the early data. It looks like Bart Ehrman holds to historical views which undermine Islam in a very strong way.
Topic 4: Does the Bible anywhere teach that Jesus is God?
It is a common theme for Muslims to assert that nowhere in the Bible does it teach that Jesus is God. Many debates have been waged on this very subject. Muslims believe that it is shirk (unforgivable sin) to associate partners with Allah. This is why Muslims will try to make a case that the Bible doesn’t teach that Jesus is God. Because they don’t understand the Trinitarian doctrine they believe we are associating another being with God. However the Trinity doctrine teaches that there is one being of God existing in three persons, not three beings. One Muslim apologist Sami Zaatari has stated:
I don’t believe the first four gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John… I don’t believe preach he is God at all. I believe they preach that he is the Messiah, a prophet and that’s it. And he did mighty miracles and great works.5
This is a bold claim but does Islam’s anti-Christian hero Bart Ehrman share the same view as Zaatari? Or does Bart Ehrman admit that there are passages in the Gospels that teach Jesus’ deity?
Bart Ehrman refutes Zaatari’s distortion and states:
The Gospel of John …goes a long way toward identifying Jesus himself as divine (see e.g., John 8:58; 10:30; 20:28).6
These are the verses which Ehrman believes attest to Jesus’ divinity in the Gospel of John:
Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." (John 8:58, NASB)
"I and the Father are one." (John 10:30, NASB)
Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28, NASB)
Although Muslim apologists will claim that the Gospels don’t teach that Jesus is God, Islam’s supposed hero Bart Ehrman lists three passages in the Gospel of John that he feels clearly attest to Christ’s divinity.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we learn that Ehrman grants many things that Islam emphatically denies which should make people wonder why they hold this man in such a high view. We learn that Ehrman accepts four important historical facts that Islam rejects about Jesus and early Christianity. Ehrman grants Jesus’ death on the cross, the reliability of Paul as an apostle and acquaintance of the disciples, Jesus’ burial, that Jesus’ followers had experiences in which they believe Jesus appeared to them, and that the Gospel of John teaches the deity of Christ. This information should be useful to anyone who is confronted by Muslims who tout Bart Ehrman as a hero for Islam. Bart Ehrman’s views should in fact be used as a weapon against Islam.
Christ has risen, he is Lord.
Footnotes
1 For a few articles and debates regarding Ehrmans views see: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
2 Bart Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, Oxford University Press, 2000], p. 197
3 Infidel Guy Interview with Bart Ehrman (31:50 – 35:38)
4 Bart Ehrman, Jesus, Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium, [Oxford University Press US, 1999], p.229
5 Sam Shamoun vs Sami Zaatari Debate: Is Jesus God? Time slice (3:49 – 4:05)
6 Bart Ehrman, Whose Word Is It? [Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006], p. 161
Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/thompson/bart_ehrman_hero.html
IHS
Wednesday, 13 March 2013
Hope in Allah’s Salvation?
A former Muslim’s Perspective
When I was a Muslim I was taught to believe that our eternal destiny and our hope of salvation in paradise are only known to Allah and under his divine control. We or any other creature have no hope whatsoever in securing such on our own, nor have we any control over our final destiny, even though Islam teaches that people may have hope to be saved by works, provided they are covered by the mercy of Allah on Judgment Day. Furthermore, the Qur’an explicitly teaches that Allah is the ultimate authority over guiding and misguiding people and that he has already determined their eternal abode. The following verses from the Qur’an demonstrate this belief very clearly:
Then what is the matter with you that you are divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allah has cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they have earned. Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made to go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance). Q. 4:88 Hilali & Khan
Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides God, lest they out of spite revile God in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did. Q. 6:108 Y. Ali
We sent not a messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them. Now Allah leaves straying those whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases: and He is Exalted in power, full of Wisdom. Q. 14:4 Y. Ali
In addition, when we study the teachings of Muhammad we find further confirmation of such belief. The following hadiths serve as examples:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Allah says, 'The vow, does not bring about for the son of Adam anything I have not decreed for him, but his vow may coincide with what has been decided for him, and by this way I cause a miser to spend of his wealth. So he gives Me (spends in charity) for the fulfillment of what has been decreed for him what he would not give Me before but for his vow." (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 78, Number 685)
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam. 'O Adam! You are our father who disappointed us and turned us out of
Abdullah b. Amr b. al-'As reported that he heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Verily, the hearts of all the sons of Adam are between the two fingers out of the fingers of the Compassionate Lord as one heart. He turns that to any (direction) He likes. Then Allahs Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: O Allah, the Turner of the hearts, turn our hearts to Thine obedience. (Sahih Bukhari, Book 033, Number 6418)
Upon examining these Islamic sources one can become convinced that Allah, the so called “most compassionate and most merciful”, actually has neither compassion nor mercy for his Muslim people, let alone for non-Muslims. In light of what we have just examined, I want to raise the question of how can anyone have a glimmer of hope in a god who made it very clear that no one has any control concerning their eternal destiny, whether it be based on their good deeds or any other means.
Furthermore, these sources show very vividly that all humans, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, are predestined to do whatever act is ordained for them including the act of shirk, which is the association of other deities beside Allah. In other words, Allah has predestined some to commit shirk against him and others not to. If this statement sounds utterly outrageous, the following verse should provide a clear proof:
And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction. Q. 17:16 Shakir
When we review some of the Islamic commentaries dealing with this verse we will read the following:
Al-Tabari in his commentary said:
Ibn Abbas said: “We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives”, means, we [Allah] commands its wicked people to transgress in the town, and once they do so I [Allah] will destroy them. (Source)1
Ar-Razi also stated:
... “We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives”, meaning we [Allah] increase its [the town’s] transgression. (Source)
Al-Qurtubi added: Allah declared in the verse preceding this one that he sends prophets to warn people before he destroys them, not that it matters to him to do so, but rather as a promise from him, and he does not change his promises.2 So if Allah wanted to destroy a village to fulfill his promise, he will order its people who live an easy life to commit abomination and injustice, therefore his commandment to destroy it will be accomplished. He is declaring that whoever perishes, will perish by Allah’s will, for he is the one who work all things with a divine purpose to fulfill his commandments. (Source)
How comforting is that thought? How can anyone trust in a god that has a divine purpose to destroy people by commanding them to sin and commit abominations to fulfill his divine purpose?
Furthermore, the Qur’an states that it was sent by Allah as a guidance ONLY to those believers who do good deeds.
Surely this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright and gives good news to the believers who do good that they shall have a great reward. Q. 17:9 Shakir
When examining some of the classical Islamic commentaries concerning this verse we read the following:
Al-Tabari
{and gives good news to the believers} ... brings glad tiding in addition to its guidance to those who are upright, who believe in Allah and his messenger, and do good deeds in this world according to what Allah has commanded them ... {shall have a great reward} from Allah as a reward for their belief and for their good deeds. {great} meaning a great reward, which is paradise, which Allah has prepared to those whom he is pleased with. (Source)
Ibn Katheer
Allah describes his book which he has revealed to Muhammad that it guides to the straight path and the clearest of ways. It also brings glad tiding to those who believe in it and do good deeds according to its teachings, that they will have great reward on the day of judgment. (Source)
Just to recap this part of our analysis, as a Muslim person or even someone who is seeking to know more about Islam, do the preceding accounts from the god of Islam give you a sense of security or assurance? If the god who claims to be the one true god, the creator of heaven and earth, the judge of mankind, if this god can’t even assure his people of being protected from his actions, and further, if he can’t even assure his righteous people as well, how then can you be certain that you will be saved from his wrath?
However, even if we were to comprehend or harmonize the preceding so called “divine” accounts, we find ourselves with even more confusing teachings concerning someone’s hope in the Islamic version of Salvation.3 This time we focus our attention on the Hadith traditions and what Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, had to say about this topic regarding someone’s assurance of salvation.
Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "No human being is killed unjustly, but a part of responsibility for the crime is laid on the first son of Adam who invented the tradition of killing (murdering) on the earth. (It is said that he was Qabil). (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 6)
This hadith appears to place the blame of the crime of murder in the world on the first son of Adam, who killed his brother. If this is true of murder, then one can say that this is true of other crimes as well. Such Islamic teaching is very confusing because it portrays humans to be in complete control of their actions whereas Allah is removed from such action. Yet earlier we read that Allah claimed to be the author of every single deed committed by humans, the good ones and the bad ones alike. This begs the question of who is in charge here, Allah or humans.
The following hadith further affirms this view that man has authority over his/her own actions.
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, "Allah will say to the person who will have the minimum punishment in the Fire on the Day of Resurrection, 'If you had things equal to whatever is on the earth, would you ransom yourself (from the punishment) with it?' He will reply, Yes. Allah will say, 'I asked you a much easier thing than this while you were in the backbone of Adam, that is, not to worship others besides Me, but you refused and insisted to worship others besides Me." (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 562)
So far we have shown contradictions between the Islamic teachings of the Qur’an and Hadith regarding the actions of humans and their relation to Allah’s predestination of such actions. However, our confusion does not stop there. The following verses from the Qur’an introduce another agent whose authority can determine the actions of humans, even having authority over their eternal destination:
But the Shaitan 4 made them both fall from it, and caused them to depart from that(state) in which they were; and We said: Get forth, some of you being the enemies of others, and there is for you in the earth an abode and a provision for a time. Q. 2:36 Shakir
Here is what Al-Tabari has to say about this verse:
{made them both fall from it}… meaning Iblis 5 [Satan] because he caused them [Adam and Eve] to sin which Allah had punished them for by removing them from heaven.
Notice that the agent who caused Adam and Eve to fall is Satan. Although, this claim may sound reasonable to accept, the language of the Qur’an tries to remove any human will from this entire action, thus making Satan not only the master mind but also the author of the fall of man.
However, if we read what Az-Zamakhshari had to say concerning this verse we uncover a hidden agent behind Satan’s action:
. . . Satan caused them to fall because he made them eat from the tree. . . a similar scenario can be found in what Allah said in {and I did not do it of my own accord} [Q. 18:82 Shakir]
What Az-Zamakhshari is referencing in [Q. 18.82] had to do with the story of a servant who accompanied Moses for a season to test his patience by performing certain acts of violence against others. When questioned by Moses concerning these actions, the servant’s response was: “I did not do it of my own accord, since it was Allah who commanded me to do it.”
In other word, Az-Zamakhshari is comparing the story of the servant with the story of the fall of Adam and Eve by stating that even though it was Satan who caused them to fall, he [Satan] was actually performing an action commanded to him by Allah. And so, we come full circle back to Allah as the sole author of all deeds of mankind. Hence, we have to ask our readers again: How can you trust in such a god who commands even the devil to cause you to sin against him in an effort to punish you?
The following verse makes the issue at hand even more convoluted by stating that Allah couldn’t save some of the nations of the past due to the power of the deception of Satan.
By Allah, We verily sent messengers unto the nations before thee, but the devil made their deeds fairseeming unto them. So he is their patron this day, and theirs will be a painful doom. Q. 16:63 Pickthall
It is rather disturbing to know such a thing, especially when Allah is swearing by himself as a testimony to the truth of this account. Al-Tabari in his commentary of this verse stated:
Allah swore by himself to his prophet Muhammad (saw) saying: By Allah, O Muhammad we sent messengers before you to their nations with the same message we sent you with to your nation, by inviting them to worship one god; to be sincere to him in worship; and to obey his commands. . . but Satan made their disbelief fairseeming to them until they rejected their messengers. (Source)
How can any individual Muslim have confidence that Allah will make any effort to protect him or her from Satan and his deception if Allah did not even care to protect entire nations? Can we even assume that Allah is able to protect anyone from Satan? It is clear, after all, that Satan was able to mislead them all even though Allah sent messengers to them, supposedly because he was intending to guide them? So, Satan deception is actually stronger than Allah’s guidance? In fact, when you read the verse closely you will be able to see that Allah uses the reference to what happened to the nations of the messengers before Muhammad as an indirect warning that the same can happen to Muhammad’s nation.
Furthermore, upon examining other verses dealing with Satan and his impact on the entire human race, the following verse makes it clear that Allah’s warning to Adam and Eve in Eden was not only against the eating from the forbidden tree, but it also was to avoid Satan:
So by deceit he brought about their fall: when they tasted of the tree, their shame became manifest to them, and they began to sew together the leaves of the garden over their bodies. And their Lord called unto them: "Did I not forbid you that tree, and tell you that Satan was an avowed enemy unto you?" Q. 7:22 Y. Ali
What this verse tells us then is that Satan had power over Adam and Eve so much so that Allah can’t even protect them from his deception. This is different than God warning Adam and Eve against disobeying God’s command6 and the consequences of such action, as the Bible teaches.7
The power of Satan according to the Qur’an includes false revelations of the Qur’an to the messengers and prophets of the past.
Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom. Q. 22:52 Y. Ali
Islamic commentaries and tradition reveal to us that the main purpose behind the revelation of this verse is that Satan revealed to Muhammad verses which Allah had not intended, and Muhammad would assume them to be from Allah. The Allah revealed this verse to him to comfort him and assure him that Allah will remedy this problem. Just let’s examine what Al-Tabari had to say about this particular verse:
It was said: the reason behind the revelation of this verse to the messenger of Allah (saw), is that Satan put in his mouth some of the verses he was reciting from the Qur’an, which was not revealed to him from Allah. As a result, the messenger of Allah (saw) was getting depressed over this, but Allah comforted him with these verses. (Source)
Al-Qurtubi added: The idolaters used to say, the prophets should never err or forget, however Allah revealed that they [the prophets] are mere humans . . . and it is permissible for humans to forget and err until Allah establishes his verses and abrogates the deceptions of Satan. (Source)
My dear Muslim brothers and sisters, I beseech you to ponder what you have just read concerning the revelations of the Qur’an. How can you be certain that whatever promises given to you throughout the Qur’an are actually from Allah? How can you be certain that your salvation according to the Qur’an is assured? What if it was Satan who spoke or uttered these promises through Muhammad or the other prophets who preceded him?8
This is a very serious matter since the Qur’an teaches that one must follow the teaching of Allah and the prophet:
And obey Allah and the Messenger; that ye may obtain mercy. Q. 3:132 Y. Ali
Those are limits set by Allah: those who obey Allah and His Messenger will be admitted to Gardens with rivers flowing beneath, to abide therein (for ever) and that will be the supreme achievement. Q. 4:13 Y. Ali
If the above verse is not strong enough to reveal to you the power of Satan, how about the verse below where the tone is more than clear that Allah is appealing to his human creations not to follow Satan who has been deceiving numerous people leading them astray, away from the straight path.
Did I not charge you, O children of Adam! that you should not serve the Shaitan? Surely he is your open enemy, and that you should serve Me; this is the right way. And certainly he led astray numerous people from among you. What! could you not then understand? Q. 36:60-62 Shakir
The problem with these verses is not only that Satan has so much power over Allah’s creation, the human beings, but the fact that Allah is a co-conspirator with Satan from the beginning. If that sounds surprising, just read the following verses and judge for yourself:9
O ye Children of Adam! Let not Satan seduce you, in the same manner as He got your parents out of the Garden, stripping them of their raiment, to expose their shame: for he and his tribe watch you from a position where ye cannot see them: We made the evil ones friends (only) to those without faith. Q. 7:27 Y. Ali
The prominent Islamic exegete Al-Baydawi in his commenatry “Anwar At-tanzeel wa Asrar At-ta’weel” says concerning this verse:
{We made the evil ones friends (only) to those without faith.} by what we [Allah] founded between the evil ones and the unbelievers of compatibility. . . by sending the evil ones to them and giving them power to deceive them and empowering them to do wickedness.
The prophet of Islam also feared Satan and his power. The following hadith tradition states this point vividly:
Narrated Safiya bint Huyai: The wife of the Prophet that she went to Allah's Apostle while he was in Itikaf (staying in the mosque) during the last ten nights of the month of Ramadan. She spoke to him for an hour (a while) at night and then she got up to return home. The Prophet got up to accompany her, and when they reached the gate of the mosque opposite the dwelling place of Um Salama, the wife of the Prophet, two Ansari men passed by, and greeting Allah's Apostle, they quickly went ahead. Allah's Apostle said to them, "Do not be in a hurry. She is Safiya, the daughter of Huyai." They said, "Subhan Allah! O Allah's Apostle (how dare we suspect you)." That was a great thing for both of them. The Prophet then said, "Satan runs in the body of Adam's son (i.e. man) as his blood circulates in it, and I was afraid that he (Satan) might insert an evil thought in your hearts." (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 238)
How comforting can it be to know that the most powerful, most knowing god [Allah], can chose to only save some or even at times uses Satan to deceive humans. In fact, the preceding verses depict Satan with an almost equal power to this god. In light of all what we have examined, is this truly a god you can follow and rest your very assurance of salvation upon? If you can’t rest upon God’s attribute of omnipotence to be able trust in Him for protection from the devil’s schemes, how can we then trust him to save us from hell and eternal punishment?
Hence, I like to appeal to my fellow Muslim people, what chance do you have before Allah to survive his awaiting punishment or to please him? I think you will agree that the answer to this is: None whatsoever.
As a result, I ask you to place your hope of Salvation from God’s wrath and His eternal damnation on the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose power over Satan was evidenced from birth and even admitted by Muhammad:
Narrated Said bin Al-Musaiyab: Abu Huraira said, "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'There is none born among the off-spring of Adam, but Satan touches it. A child therefore, cries loudly at the time of birth because of the touch of Satan, except Mary and her child." Then Abu Huraira recited: "And I seek refuge with You for her and for her offspring from the outcast Satan" (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 641)
When Muhammad said that he without a doubt had this Qur’anic verse in mind:
When she was delivered, she said: "O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child!"- and Allah knew best what she brought forth- "And no wise is the male Like the female. I have named her Mary, and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the Evil One, the Rejected. Q. 3:36 Y. Ali
In conclusion, I pray that the evidences presented to you throughout this paper will open your eyes to one truth, that Jesus Christ is the only one who can protect you and provide you with the straight path to Heaven. His work of Salvation is guaranteed10 and His love for you was evident on the cross. May the Lord bless you and open your eyes to the devil and His schemes in order that you may find light in Him.
Footnotes
1 Translations of Arabic sources are my own.
2 For more on the fact that Allah does change his promises, please see these articles: 1, 2, 3, 4.
3 For more on the Islamic teachings of Salvation and its inconsistency, see these articles: 1, 2, 3.
4 Shaitan is the Arabic word for “Satan”.
5 Iblis is another name for Satan in Islamic traditions.
6 Genesis 2:17
7 For more on this account in the Bible, please refer to Genesis chapter 3.
8 For more on this issue or the issue of the completeness of the Qur’an, please read the following articles: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
9 For more Qur’anic verses regarding the power of Satan over Humans, see Q. 16:63 and 17:63-64.
10 For more on this hope, please read this article.
Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/alfadi/hope.html
IHS
Tuesday, 12 March 2013
Does Islam Discourage Slavery?
Dear Sir/Madam
I was looking at islam online and came across a Q&A section and was interested in a question about slave women as this is something often featured on FFI. I have copied it below and would be intrigued to read your take on it.
Regards Raheel
http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE&cid=1147955887938
Sarah –
Title About Concubines & Slavery
Date 22/May/2006
Question As-salamu `alaykum!
Why is a man permitted to have concubines in addition to having a wife? And, in a case that a man has 4 wives (surely his needs are being met) why would it still be allowable to have a concubine? Why are concubines and harems allowed at all, especially if it doesn’t seem to be very fair for women? Does the wife have a say in it? What rights does a concubine have?
I understand how Islam permits polygamy with conditions that provide fairness and protection for women, but I just don’t understand the issue of concubines. Prophet Sulayman (Solomon) is said to have had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines. Obviously, this was in a time before Islam regulated polygamy, but how can concubines be considered fair or respectable?
Jazakum Allahu Khayran.
Topic Culture & Society
Name of Counselor Amani Aboul Fadl Farag
Answer:
Salam, dear Safina.
Thank you for raising this point which is a matter of confusion to many non-Muslims and Muslims as well!
First, it is important to define the term “concubine” as it is usually misunderstood. Some think that “concubine” refers to the mistress or the woman who lives a non-marital relationship with a man, and who is inferior in rank to the legal wife. This might be due to the fact that people see famous men like kings and princes having concubines in their courts. Of course, such a relationship is outlawed in Islam.
As for Islam, the term “concubine” refers to a woman slave who is owned by a certain man either through serfdom, or by being a war captive. According to this definition, it becomes obvious that taking concubines, as well as slaves, is out of date. It is a system that existed early in the history of humanity but has ceased to exist any more under the law of abolishing servitude, not only in the Muslim communities, but also all over the world. No one now is allowed to take a slave or a concubine in our modern times; it is criminal to do so.
This image of one man buying tens of women to meet his endless desires is but a far memory of an old history. This is not only for the legal considerations of abolishing servitude, but also for the economic and health problems befalling the modern man disabling him from following the model of Shahrayar, the king in The Arabian Nights, even if he aspires to!
The only form of relationship between men and women among Muslims now is that of marriage, and anything outside it is not accepted.
Having a look at the history of this phenomenon, one finds that it was not confined to the Muslim world, though it is sometimes portrayed as if it is a Muslim-made tradition, coming from the East.
The Arabian Nights represents Muslim society as highly sensual, living in an erotic atmosphere with every single man having an army of concubines playing around in his bed to satisfy his surfeit needs! If this was the real picture of Muslim society in its early and middle ages, then who was behind the great scientific and military achievements that happened at that time?
When Islam was revealed, taking male and female slaves —either through buying or being taken as war captives— was a widespread phenomenon. This was not only in the
Because Islam existed in various historical epochs, it has been its inevitable role to cope with the norms and to regulate the legal systems of those epochs. So, for the tradition of taking slaves and concubines, that already existed then, Islam interfered by regulating it in an attempt to abolish it gradually. It couldn’t have been abolished abruptly, since it was such a deep rooted tradition.
Islam has always adopted the strategy of gradual reformation rather than rapid radical solutions, especially in aspects that are vital to people’s lives such as religion, economy or politics. The issue of idol worshipping, for example, took 13 years of persuasion till the Prophet decided to pull idols down. This has always been Islam’s malleable nature, which made its spirit — and not only script — survive for almost 15 centuries and not perish or extinct by time.
Back to the historical survey of the issue of concubines, Islam worked gradually in two directions to free slaves and concubines. The first was by encouraging the believers to buy and free slaves. Almighty Allah offered
The second was by making the act of freeing slaves a form of kaffarah (punishment or penalty) as a make-up “penalty”, if a person commits some forbidden deeds. And in this way, punishment became pleasing to both the slave and the punished one, who would have wanted to receive God’s forgiveness, for the forbidden deed, by doing the good deed of freeing a slave.
Parallel to that process of gradual freeing — and until all slaves were freed — Allah granted slaves and concubines — who had not yet gained their liberty — many human rights that had never been given to them before.
For example, when a concubine begot a child by her master, the child would immediately be recognized as legal and free. The child would carry the father’s name and inherit the same like any brothers and sisters begotten by wives. As for the concubine herself, she is directly elevated to a higher status, that is of om-el-walad (legal mother of a legal child). Her owner can no longer sell her as a slave and in case he dies, she is automatically free.
No wonder that up to the 17th century, Mamluks — who were slaves owned by the Islamic state — were allowed high education and job opportunities exactly like their masters. They were trained in chivalry and were upgraded in the social rank until they reached the positions of sultans and kings of the whole Islamic state. This was termed in history as the
Nobody ever looked with sensitivity or with dissatisfaction at the experience of being ruled by a “slave” who owned by the state. This
I only wanted to clear the idea of concubines as an interesting fact of the past, which has no mention in Islamic life any more in today’s world. Thank you and I am looking forward to receiving more of your interesting questions. Please keep in touch
Response by Ali Sina
Slavery or “right hand possession” is recognized and accepted in the Quran. Muslims are allowed and encouraged to raid non-Muslims and after killing the men take their women and children as slaves. Older women can be killed or left to die.
Based on his response it appears that Mr. Amani Aboul Fadl Farag says that Islamic law that comes from God and according to Muhammad is valid until the Day of Resurrection has become outdated. Is this not bid’a? (innovation). Isn’t bid’a prohibited in the Quran and punishable by death? Is Mr. Amani Aboul Fadl Farag saying that parts of the Quran are outdated? Doesn’t the Quran strictly prohibit taking parts of it and leaving other parts?
If slavery and right hand possessions are outdated, can we also conclude that other injections of the Quran may also be outdated?
For example, the Quran allows a man to marry four wives. This law seems outdated too. It causes psychological distress for the wives who have to compete with each other for their husband’s attention, and it causes rivalry among their children. Polygamy is very unhealthy from the psychological point of view for everyone involved. Can Muslims decide to ban polygamy and override the Quran?
What about the law of fasting? Fasting in places close to the Earth’s poles is impossible during the summer. Can Muslims pick and choose and make rulings that differ from the Quran and hadith? They actually do it, whenever they get stuck. But is it allowed?
What about the testimony of women? Today the modern secular law does not accept anything but equality between men and women. Can Muslims abrogate the laws of the Quran and adopt the secular laws of the kafirs because they are more up to date?
What about chopping the right hand of the thief? It is rarely practiced, but isn’t abolishing it a contravention from divine guidance?
How about beating one’s wife? Can an Islamic country prohibit it when the Quran prescribes it? Would that country be regarded Islamic?
Mr. Farag, by preferring the secular law over the laws of God is opening a Pandora box and allowing men to abrogate any law of God that they deem outdated. Is this allowed and if so where one has to draw the line? Is man’s understanding superior to the understanding of God? Can a man question the authority and the wisdom of the Quran?
Mr. Farag says that “Islam interfered by regulating it in an attempt to abolish it gradually. It couldn’t have been abolished abruptly, since it was such a deep rooted tradition.”
Why slavery could not be abolished abruptly? Didn’t Islam abolish adopting children abruptly? Allah told his prophet to marry his own daughter in law to set an example and show to Arabs that the old rules are changed and an adopted son is not a son and his wife is halal. Wasn’t this far more shocking to the believers than abolishing slavery?
Muhammad even encouraged Muslims to fight against their own brothers and fathers if they like disbelief to Islam. Wasn’t this a much harsher teaching than abolishing slavery?
If Muhammad wanted to abolish slavery why did he reduce tens of thousands of free people into slaves? After their prophet, Muslims raided other countries killing millions of men and enslaving their wives and children. The actions of Muhammad and his early followers belie the claim of Mr. Farag that he wanted to abolish slavery gradually. Do we have a verse in the Quran or hadith saying that slavery should be abolished eventually?
Mr. Farag says,“Islam has always adopted the strategy of gradual reformation rather than rapid radical solutions” and to prove Islam’s “malleable” nature he brings the example of Muhammad’s desecration of Ka’ba and demolition of Pagan’s idols, which he says was gradual and took 13 years. Mr. Farag is twisting the facts. Muhammad demolished the idols of the Arabs in the very day he conquered
Mr. Farag says Islam encouraged the believers to buy and free slaves. Nothing can be farther from the truth. Muhammad made slaves from free people and sold them. He started doing this since his very first successful raid at a small Meccan caravan at Nakhlah where the two surviving captives were kept for ransom and released after their relatives paid a hefty sum. Muslims started as a bunch of impoverished people but through raids they amassed huge wealth and countless slaves. The claims made by this Muslim scholar are not substantiated by facts. They contradict the history of Islam written by the early Muslims. Muslims did not have slaves when they migrated to
He also talks about the reward promised to Muslims for freeing slaves. Yes that is true. But his actions were belied by his words. Only fools judge a man’s character by his words. Wiser people look at the actions of the person. Look how many brain dead people have fallen for the empty words of a buffoon like Obama. Wiser people look at his actions and at his past.
Furthermore, Muslims did not manumit their able bodied and young slaves. They freed them when they became old and a burden to their masters. In this way, not only they did not have to maintain them, but also their sins were forgiven. The old slaves ended up as beggars in the streets and died alone and in poverty. What a mockery of justice! How many of the slaves that Muhammad during his raids did he set free and restored to them their wealth?
Mr. Farag says that slaves in Islam were granted rights that prior to that they did not have, “for example, when a concubine begot a child by her master, the child would immediately be recognized as legal and free.”
This tradition existed in that desert society long before Muhammad was born. A good example is Abraham’s son Ismael, who was born to a slave woman and was recognized by Abraham as his son and not as a slave. After Ismael’s birth, his mother Agar also gained her freedom. It is just commonsense that a man would not sell his own children as slaves. Now we have to even give credit to Muhammad for something that is not only commonsense but existed for ever. In no society the child of a free man born to a slave was considered to be a slave. Remember that women were thought to be only incubators for mans’ progeny. The children belonged to the father. If the father was a free man, so were his children.
Like any good Muslim Mr. Farag could not resist pouring his venom on
He conveniently ignored the fact that those slaves were bought from Arab slave merchants who systematically raided the villages in
In his attempt to deny historic facts Mr. Farag wrote: “The Arabian Nights represents Muslim society as highly sensual, living in an erotic atmosphere with every single man having an army of concubines playing around in his bed to satisfy his surfeit needs! If this was the real picture of Muslim society in its early and middle ages, then who was behind the great scientific and military achievements that happened at that time?”
Military achievements were made to reduce people into slaves and fill the harem of Muslim fighters with “right hand possessions” and sexual trophies. Taking sex slaves was the main incentive for jihad.
Muslim scholars try their best to mask the ugly truth about Islam, but their own books of history testify against them. With the advent of the Internet and the free spread of knowledge, truth can no longer be concealed. With the spread of truth Islam’s days are numbered.
Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/10/12/does-islam-discourage-slavery/
IHS
Sunday, 10 March 2013
You cannot kill a Muslim because he killed a Christian"
"The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth that of a Muslim." --'Umdat al-Salik, o4.9
"Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the shaving of his head, and one year of banishment. But if the man is not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is execution...Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death by the next of kin. But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be punished with the lash....Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim...then his punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain...Again, the penalties of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in general, and so must be executed....Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them." -- Sultanhussein Tabandeh, A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
"Four Sudan Islamists to hang for US diplomat murder," from AFP, October 12:
KHARTOUM-- A Sudanese court sentenced four Islamists to death for a second time on Monday for the murder of a US diplomat and his driver in Khartoum last year.
The sentencing came after the mother of John Granville, who worked with the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and the wife of driver Abdel Rahman Abbas both demanded the men be executed.
Granville and Abbas were returning from a New Year's celebration in 2008 when the gunmen opened fire on their car, riddling them both with bullets.
"The murder of a person is as illegal from the point of view of shariah (Islamic law) as it is in Sudanese criminal law," the judge, Said Ahmed al-Badri, said when announcing the sentence.
The court had condemned the men to death in June for the New Year's Day murders of Granville and Abbas but the sentences were cancelled in August after Abbas's father forgave the men.
Under Islamic law, the victim's family has the right to forgive the murderer, ask for compensation or demand execution.
Granville's mother, Jane Granville, at the time had asked for the men's execution but her letter was rejected because it was not notarised. A new letter was submitted by her and read out by a court prosecutor on Sunday.
On Monday, Abbas's wife appeared before the court to demand the death penalty for the four convicts.
One of the defendants, Mohammed Osman Yusef, shouted after sentencing: "You cannot killed a Muslim because he killed a Christian."
Dressed in a traditional white robe, the bearded Yusef, a former military officer, also accused the
"Islamic law condemns murder, regardless of the nationality or religion (of the victim)," the judge said. Some Muslim scholars say a Muslim can be punished, but not executed, for killing a non-Muslim.
The judge added that according to Islamic law Granville was a "dhimmi" in
Sudanese law does not recognise non-Muslims in the country as dhimmis....
It said the murder was in response to attempts to raise the banner of Christianity over
Source: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/10/you-cannot-kill-a-muslim-because-he-killed-a-christian.html
IHS