jaybird
Well-Known Member
- Feb 29, 2016
- 1,595
- 559
- 113
Mahdi and Jesus
- Thread starter Can Erdem Bola
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It all depends on the spirit that has a hold of Him. ALL other religions have a spiritual demon as their influencing guide. Only, those who have the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob have a relationship with the one True God.
God spoke to Abraham in Genesis 15:16 and said that around 4,000 years after the Birth of Isaac, that his descendants would return to the Land of Canaan, in their own strength looking for Him, but at that time the iniquities of the Amorite people who will be living in and around Jerusalem will not have reached it peak, but will do so shortly afterwards. Today the Amorite people groups are found holding to the teaching of Islam and this is the iniquity that God was speaking of in the prophecy that God told to Abraham concerning his descendants in the distant future back then.
Today we are living during the time of the fulfilment of this prophecy, and Israel is looking for God's Earth that God said that He would give to them. Sadly, they associate the Promised Land, which was given as a sign to confirm that they would inherit the whole earth in the distant future, even from this time that we are living in today.
What is going to happen, in our near future, is this, God is going to judge the demonic angels in heaven and have them imprisoned in a Bottomless pit from which they will have no influence over the peoples of the earth, and at the same time He will judge the Kings of the earth for their part today in the trampling of His sanctuary and His Earthly Hosts, on the face of the earth, and together with the wicked fallen heavenly Hosts they too will be imprisoned in the locked Bottomless pit for many days awaiting the time for their receiving of their punishment for their wickedness against the one true God. Isaiah 24:21-22.
At this time the demonic beasts that are controlling the other religions of the world, will have their dominions take away from them and Christ, the Son of Man, will be given a dominion over all of the peoples of the earth that they should worship Him and only Him alone. At this time a Rock, in the form of a foundation stone, untouched by human hands will come down from heaven and it will strike the controlling statue "idol" of Babylon on its feet and it will topple down to the ground where it will be ground down into dust and chaff to be blown away by the winds of the earth and be no more.
The foundation stone that comes down out of heaven will be the foundation of the religion that worships the one true God, and it will become like the highest mountain, i.e. religion. in all of the world, based on the one truth, that Jesus is the Son of God and those that believe on Him will inherit the whole earth after the Great White Throne Room judgement of all the earth and creation, because of their righteousness gain through their relationship with Christ and God, and those who are not righteous will go to receive their punishment in the Lake of Fire, which is the second death.
Those who walk solely in God's Earth, will live forever, and will continue to worship God in all of His Glory on the refurbished and repaired earth.
Shalom.
It isn't enough to say you are born again, it involves a choice. Being born again is where we turn our backs on our old life - a life where we have not given much thought to God and have pleased ourselves - and turn to Jesus and ask him into our lives and by doing that we are born spiritually into God's family. It's called repentance. We turn to God, we renounce evil, and all other gods and give ourselves and our love to the King of kings, the LORD of lords and the Name that is above all names.
Then God's Holy Spirit will dwell within us and will guide us and help us live the Christian life and be pleasing to God. Muslims can do this, so can Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists and people from any walk of life or any religion. There is only one true God and his Son is Jesus. And Jesus said,
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day." John 6:44
And also: John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
jaybird
Well-Known Member
- Feb 29, 2016
- 1,595
- 559
- 113
do you think the Christian Churches are free of demons? its hard to believe with all the burning people alive and torture in the middle ages, modern day child sex scandals, and the mega church money preachers. im proud to follow Jesus but when comparing our churches to other religions IMO our churches are worse and have done far more damage than all the rest combined.
jaybird
Well-Known Member
- Feb 29, 2016
- 1,595
- 559
- 113
No. Missionaries often exported what was horrendously bad from their own culture and forced it upon the people that they said that they had gone to save. It is no different today. The missionaries set out to destroy cultures that they went to and in effect set the people against each other, rather than encouraging the spirit of cooperation that they had between themselves within their culture.
Shalom
Mantis
Well-Known Member
The Koran is the Old Testament plagiarized and edited to make Ishmael Abraham’s covenant son, instead of Isaac, to replace the Messiah with the Mahdi, with the added ideology of world conquest by the sword, or any other method possible, such as immigration.
It’s actually an antichrist religion, because it claims God has no son.
It’s actually an antichrist religion, because it claims God has no son.
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
The new birth is generated by God....it is a supernatural phenomena....a phenomena so radical the language of 'new birth' is used.
God draws us and if we respond and are willing he will instil in us his Spirit....from that point our journey of understanding begins. It manifests in walking a different direction to previous.
Whereabouts in the Qur'an is the Messiah replaced by the Mahdi; and whereabouts does the Qur'an sanction 'world conquest by the sword'?
Last edited:
Mohammed plagiarized the Old Testament- he changed the messiah to the mahdi, made Ishmael the covenant son instead of Isasc, and more.
Surah 3:151: “We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve (all non-Muslims) ...”
Surah 2:191: “And kill them (non-Muslims) wherever you find them ... kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers (non-Muslims).”
Surah 9:5: “Then kill the disbelievers (non-Muslims) wherever you find them, capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush ...”
Did you ever read the history of what Mohammed did?
The goal of Islam is to make the world an Islamic caliphate:
As a universal religion, Islam envisages a global political order in which all humankind will live under Muslim rule as either believers or subject communities. In order to achieve this goal it is incumbent on all free, male, adult Muslims to carry out an uncompromising struggle "in the path of Allah", or jihad. This in turn makes those parts of the world that have not yet been conquered by the House of Islam an abode of permanent conflict (Dar al-Harb, the "house of war") which will only end with Islam's eventual triumph
The idea for the mahdi came from the Old Testament.
BTW when Jesus returns, He is not subservient to the mahdi.
Jesus will rule all the nations with a rod of Iron for a thousand years.
Shalom Aleichem
Last edited:
@Curtis
As-Salāmu ‘alaykum.
I asked: ‘Whereabouts does the Qur'an sanction 'world conquest by the sword'?
In reply, you quote – without comment – these verses:
Surah 3:151: “We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve (all non-Muslims) ...”
Surah 2:191: “And kill them (non-Muslims) wherever you find them ... kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers (non-Muslims).”
Each of the following has produced an English translation of the Qur’an:
Sahih International; Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan; Mohammed Marmaduke William Pickthall; Abdullah Yusuf Ali; Mohammad Habib Shakir; Professor Dr. Mohammad Mahmoud Ghali; Ali Unal; Amatul Rahman Omar; Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias; Ahmed Ali; Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban and Martha Schulte-Nafeh; A. J. Arberry; Abdul Majid Daryabadi; Maulana Mohammad Ali; Muhammad Sarwar; Hamid Abdul Aziz; Faridul Haque; Talal Itani; Ahmed Raza Khan; Maulana Wahiduddin Khan; Safi-ur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri; Ali Quli Qarai; Hasan al-Fatih Qaribullah and Ahmad Darwish; Ahmed Hulusi; Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr; and Professor Mohammad Abdel Haleem.
None of these folk include the words ‘(all non-Muslims)’; or ‘(non-Muslims)’ in their translations, as you have done.
These inclusions – as you present them – are a lie, intended to deceive those who do not realise that parentheses are not found in the Qur’an. In every case – and every translator makes use of them – parentheses are used to clarify a text – or to express a personal opinion, or prejudice (as is the case with your examples).
There is peril is ripping verses out of their context.
Here is verse 151 of sūrah Al‘Imran (in its setting, and emphasised):
‘You who believe, if you obey the disbelievers, they will make you revert to your old ways and you will turn into losers. No indeed! It is Allāh who is your protector: He is the best of helpers. We will strike panic into the disbelievers’ hearts because they attribute partners to Allāh although He has sent no authority for this: their shelter will be the Fire – how miserable is the home of the evildoers! Allāh fulfilled His promise to you: you were routing them, with His permission, but then you faltered, disputed the order, and disobeyed, once He had brought you within sight of your goal – some of you desire the gains of this world and others desire the world to come – and then He prevented you from (defeating) them as a punishment. He has now forgiven you: Allāh is most gracious to the believers.’ (Verses 149-151).
These verses are a reference to the Battle of Uhud, it which it was rumoured that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) had been killed.
Those warriors who ‘desire(d) the gains of this world’ were the Muslim archers. Thinking that the battle was won, they ignored the Prophet’s command to remain in their positions, and instead ran ahead, seeking booty. This allowed the Meccans – the Quraysh; here described as ‘disbelievers’) – to regroup and attack, so winning the battle.
The Quraysh were, of course, polytheists. They are the ones who ‘attribute partners to Allāh.’
Commenting on these verses, Sayyid Quṭb writes:
‘The unbelievers will feel terror in their hearts, because they do not rely on any firm support. They have no power of their own, and they do not enjoy the support of any other powerful source. They have attributed to God partners who have no authority or power of their own, because God has never bestowed any warrant on them.’ (‘In the Shade of the Qur’an: Volume 3).
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
Continued:
As-Salāmu ‘alaykum.
I asked: ‘Whereabouts does the Qur'an sanction 'world conquest by the sword'?
In reply, you quote – without comment – these verses:
Surah 3:151: “We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve (all non-Muslims) ...”
Surah 2:191: “And kill them (non-Muslims) wherever you find them ... kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers (non-Muslims).”
Each of the following has produced an English translation of the Qur’an:
Sahih International; Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan; Mohammed Marmaduke William Pickthall; Abdullah Yusuf Ali; Mohammad Habib Shakir; Professor Dr. Mohammad Mahmoud Ghali; Ali Unal; Amatul Rahman Omar; Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias; Ahmed Ali; Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban and Martha Schulte-Nafeh; A. J. Arberry; Abdul Majid Daryabadi; Maulana Mohammad Ali; Muhammad Sarwar; Hamid Abdul Aziz; Faridul Haque; Talal Itani; Ahmed Raza Khan; Maulana Wahiduddin Khan; Safi-ur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri; Ali Quli Qarai; Hasan al-Fatih Qaribullah and Ahmad Darwish; Ahmed Hulusi; Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr; and Professor Mohammad Abdel Haleem.
None of these folk include the words ‘(all non-Muslims)’; or ‘(non-Muslims)’ in their translations, as you have done.
These inclusions – as you present them – are a lie, intended to deceive those who do not realise that parentheses are not found in the Qur’an. In every case – and every translator makes use of them – parentheses are used to clarify a text – or to express a personal opinion, or prejudice (as is the case with your examples).
There is peril is ripping verses out of their context.
Here is verse 151 of sūrah Al‘Imran (in its setting, and emphasised):
‘You who believe, if you obey the disbelievers, they will make you revert to your old ways and you will turn into losers. No indeed! It is Allāh who is your protector: He is the best of helpers. We will strike panic into the disbelievers’ hearts because they attribute partners to Allāh although He has sent no authority for this: their shelter will be the Fire – how miserable is the home of the evildoers! Allāh fulfilled His promise to you: you were routing them, with His permission, but then you faltered, disputed the order, and disobeyed, once He had brought you within sight of your goal – some of you desire the gains of this world and others desire the world to come – and then He prevented you from (defeating) them as a punishment. He has now forgiven you: Allāh is most gracious to the believers.’ (Verses 149-151).
These verses are a reference to the Battle of Uhud, it which it was rumoured that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) had been killed.
Those warriors who ‘desire(d) the gains of this world’ were the Muslim archers. Thinking that the battle was won, they ignored the Prophet’s command to remain in their positions, and instead ran ahead, seeking booty. This allowed the Meccans – the Quraysh; here described as ‘disbelievers’) – to regroup and attack, so winning the battle.
The Quraysh were, of course, polytheists. They are the ones who ‘attribute partners to Allāh.’
Commenting on these verses, Sayyid Quṭb writes:
‘The unbelievers will feel terror in their hearts, because they do not rely on any firm support. They have no power of their own, and they do not enjoy the support of any other powerful source. They have attributed to God partners who have no authority or power of their own, because God has never bestowed any warrant on them.’ (‘In the Shade of the Qur’an: Volume 3).
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
Continued:
Last edited:
Here is verse 191 of sūrah Al-Baqara (in its context, and emphasised):
‘Fight in Allāh’s cause against those who fight you, but do not overstep the limits (walā taʿtadū): Allāh does not love those who overstep the limits. Kill them wherever you encounter them, and drive them out from where they drove you out, for persecution is more serious than killing. Do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they fight you there. If they do fight you, kill them – this is what such disbelievers deserve – but if they stop, then Allāh is most forgiving and merciful. Fight them until there is no more persecution, and worship is devoted to Allāh. If they cease hostilities, there can be no (further) hostility, except towards aggressors. A sacred month for a sacred month: violation of sanctity (calls for) fair retribution. So if anyone commits aggression against you, attack him as he attacked you, but be mindful of Allāh, and know that He is with those who are mindful of Him. Spend in Allāh’s cause: do not contribute to your destruction with your own hands, but do good, for Allāh loves those who do good.
‘Complete the pilgrimages, major and minor, for the sake of Allāh. If you are prevented (from doing so), then (send) whatever offering for sacrifice you can afford, and do not shave your heads until the offering has reached the place of sacrifice. If any of you is ill, or has an ailment of the scalp, he should compensate by fasting, or feeding the poor, or offering sacrifice. When you are in safety, anyone wishing to take a break between the minor pilgrimage and the major one must make whatever offering he can afford. If he lacks the means, he should fast for three days during the pilgrimage, and seven days on his return, making ten days in all. This applies to those whose household is not near the Sacred Mosque. Always be mindful of Allāh, and be aware that He is stern in His retribution.
‘The pilgrimage takes place during the prescribed months. There should be no indecent speech, misbehaviour, or quarrelling for anyone undertaking the pilgrimage – whatever good you do, Allāh is well aware of it. Provide well for yourselves: the best provision is to be mindful of God – always be mindful of Me, you who have understanding.’ (Al-Baqara: 190-197)
Comments:
Verse 190 contains the imperative ‘walā taʿtadū’ (‘do not overstep the limits). There is consensus among the scholars of Islam that this command: ‘Includes prohibition of starting hostilities, fighting non-combatants, disproportionate response to aggression, etc.’ (Muhammad Abdel Haleem: ‘The Qur’an’).
Muhammad Abdel Haleem – King Fahd Professor of Islamic Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London writes of verse 191:
‘The Muslims were concerned as to whether it was permitted to retaliate when attacked within the sacred precincts in Mecca when on pilgrimage. They are here given permission to fight back wherever they encounter their attackers, in the precinct or outside it.’ (‘The Qur’an’).
Verses 192 -193: (‘But if they stop, then Allāh is most forgiving and merciful. Fight them until there is no more persecution, and worship is devoted to God. If they cease hostilities, there can be no (further) hostility, except towards aggressors’) remind the Muslims that only defensive warfare is permitted in Islam.
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
Continued:
‘Fight in Allāh’s cause against those who fight you, but do not overstep the limits (walā taʿtadū): Allāh does not love those who overstep the limits. Kill them wherever you encounter them, and drive them out from where they drove you out, for persecution is more serious than killing. Do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they fight you there. If they do fight you, kill them – this is what such disbelievers deserve – but if they stop, then Allāh is most forgiving and merciful. Fight them until there is no more persecution, and worship is devoted to Allāh. If they cease hostilities, there can be no (further) hostility, except towards aggressors. A sacred month for a sacred month: violation of sanctity (calls for) fair retribution. So if anyone commits aggression against you, attack him as he attacked you, but be mindful of Allāh, and know that He is with those who are mindful of Him. Spend in Allāh’s cause: do not contribute to your destruction with your own hands, but do good, for Allāh loves those who do good.
‘Complete the pilgrimages, major and minor, for the sake of Allāh. If you are prevented (from doing so), then (send) whatever offering for sacrifice you can afford, and do not shave your heads until the offering has reached the place of sacrifice. If any of you is ill, or has an ailment of the scalp, he should compensate by fasting, or feeding the poor, or offering sacrifice. When you are in safety, anyone wishing to take a break between the minor pilgrimage and the major one must make whatever offering he can afford. If he lacks the means, he should fast for three days during the pilgrimage, and seven days on his return, making ten days in all. This applies to those whose household is not near the Sacred Mosque. Always be mindful of Allāh, and be aware that He is stern in His retribution.
‘The pilgrimage takes place during the prescribed months. There should be no indecent speech, misbehaviour, or quarrelling for anyone undertaking the pilgrimage – whatever good you do, Allāh is well aware of it. Provide well for yourselves: the best provision is to be mindful of God – always be mindful of Me, you who have understanding.’ (Al-Baqara: 190-197)
Comments:
Verse 190 contains the imperative ‘walā taʿtadū’ (‘do not overstep the limits). There is consensus among the scholars of Islam that this command: ‘Includes prohibition of starting hostilities, fighting non-combatants, disproportionate response to aggression, etc.’ (Muhammad Abdel Haleem: ‘The Qur’an’).
Muhammad Abdel Haleem – King Fahd Professor of Islamic Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London writes of verse 191:
‘The Muslims were concerned as to whether it was permitted to retaliate when attacked within the sacred precincts in Mecca when on pilgrimage. They are here given permission to fight back wherever they encounter their attackers, in the precinct or outside it.’ (‘The Qur’an’).
Verses 192 -193: (‘But if they stop, then Allāh is most forgiving and merciful. Fight them until there is no more persecution, and worship is devoted to God. If they cease hostilities, there can be no (further) hostility, except towards aggressors’) remind the Muslims that only defensive warfare is permitted in Islam.
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
Continued:
Concerning sūrah Al-Tawba: 5:
This is the so-called ‘Sword Verse’ (an ironic title, since the word ‘sword’ does not occur in the Qur’an).
Since the tenth century certain Islamic scholars have claimed that this verse abrogated many Qur’anic verses, including those that permitted Muslims to deal fairly towards non-Muslims, and to live peacefully with them.
The majority of scholars deny this claim. However, this does not prevent militant Islamists – and hostile non-Muslims – using the verse, either to justify their atrocities – in the case of the former – or their attacks on Islam – in the case of the latter.
Here is the verse (in its setting, and emphasised):
‘A release by Allāh and His Messenger from the treaty you (believers) made with the idolaters (is announced) – you (idolaters) may move freely about the land for four months, but you should bear in mind both that you will not escape Allāh and that Allāh will disgrace those who defy (Him). On the Day of the Great Pilgrimage (there will be) a proclamation from Allāh and His Messenger to all people: ‘Allāh and His Messenger are released from (treaty) obligations to the idolaters. It will be better for you (idolaters) if you repent; know that you cannot escape Allāh if you turn away.’ (Prophet), warn those who ignore (Allāh) that they will have a painful punishment. As for those who have honoured the treaty you made with them and who have not supported anyone against you: fulfil your agreement with them to the end of their term. Allāh loves those who are mindful of Him.’ (Verses 1-4).
‘When the (four) forbidden months are over, wherever you encounter the idolaters, kill them, seize them, besiege them, wait for them at every lookout post; but if they turn (to Allāh), maintain the prayer, and pay the prescribed alms, let them go on their way, for Allāh is most forgiving and merciful.’ (Verse 5)
‘If any one of the idolaters should seek your protection (Prophet), grant it to him so that he may hear the word of Allāh, then take him to a place safe for him, for they are people with no knowledge (of it). How could there be a treaty with Allāh and His Messenger for such idolaters? But as for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque, so long as they remain true to you, be true to them; Allāh loves those who are mindful of Him.’ (Verses 6-7).
‘(How,) when, if they were to get the upper hand over you, they would not respect any tie with you, of kinship or of treaty? They please you with their tongues, but their hearts are against you and most of them are lawbreakers. They have sold Allāh’s message for a trifling gain, and barred others from His path. How evil their actions are! Where believers are concerned, they respect no tie of kinship or treaty. They are the ones who are committing aggression. If they turn to Allāh, keep up the prayer, and pay the prescribed alms, then they are your brothers in faith: We make the messages clear for people who are willing to learn. But if they break their oath after having made an agreement with you, if they revile your religion, then fight the leaders of disbelief – oaths mean nothing to them – so that they may stop. How could you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, who tried to drive the Messenger out, who attacked you first? Do you fear them? It is Allāh you should fear if you are true believers.’ (Verses 8-13).
Let’s look more closely at a number of these verses:
Verse 1 announces the annulment of a treaty (possibly the Treaty of Ḥudaybiyah) between the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and the Quraysh.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr informs us that: ‘Among (the various tribes) were the Banū Khuzāʿah on the side of the Prophet and Banū Bakr on the side of the Quraysh. Banū Bakr later launched an attack on the Banū Khuzāʿah, stemming from a vendetta that preexisted the Treaty of Ḥudaybiyah, and it was reported that the Quraysh assisted the Banū Bakr with arms and a small number of men.
‘The Prophet considered this act to be a breach of the treaty, thereby nullifying the need to observe the truce, and this ultimately led to the final conquest of Makkah by the Prophet and his followers. According to this account, the repudiation of the treaty is addressed to the Makkans.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary’).
Nasr goes on to say that a majority of commentators opine that verse 1 was revealed a year after the breach of the Treaty; and that there is a ‘considerable difference of opinion as to which idolaters are addressed and the legal import of both the repudiation (v. 1) and the announcement (v. 3).’
Either way, verse 4 (‘As for those who have honoured the treaty you made with them and who have not supported anyone against you: fulfil your agreement with them to the end of their term. Allāh loves those who are mindful of Him.’) commands the Muslims to honour any peace treaty they have with those (disbelievers) who have also honoured their obligations, and who have not supported military action against the Muslims.
Verse 6: (‘If any one of the idolaters should seek your protection (Prophet), grant it to him so that he may hear the word of Allāh, then take him to a place safe for him….’) makes it perfectly clear that the Muslims are not to consider a peaceful disbeliever an enemy. Allāh (Subḥānahu ūta'āla) goes further, and commands the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) to give his protection to any non-Muslim who seeks his help, and to deliver them to a place of safety.
Verses 7-8 refer to the hostile attitude of Meccan idolaters who cared nothing for kinship, and who initiated acts of aggression. It is because of this that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) is released from his treaty obligations.
Verse 11 commands the Muslims to forgive those polytheists who honour their treaties, and to live in peace with them. Should any of the polytheist chose to accept Islam, they are to be treated as brothers.
Verse 13 urges the Muslims to fight aggression. They are reminded that it was the polytheists who broke the treaty they had with them.
And now for verse 5:
You will note – I trust – that this verse refers only to the polytheists of Mecca (the Quraysh), whose long-standing fitna (persecution) of the Muslims grew so great that the Quraysh were determined to convert the Muslims back to paganism, or else finish them off.
Muhammad Abdel Haleem states (correctly) that Al-Tawba 5 is: ‘Much referred to but notoriously misinterpreted and taken out of context.’
He goes on:
‘It was these hardened polytheists in Arabia, who would accept nothing other than the expulsion of the Muslims or their reversion to paganism, and who repeatedly broke their treaties, that the Muslims were ordered to treat in the same way – to fight them or expel them.
‘Even with such an enemy Muslims were not simply ordered to pounce on them and reciprocate by breaking the treaty themselves; instead, an ultimatum was issued, giving the enemy notice, that after the four sacred months mentioned in v.9:5 above, the Muslims would wage war on them.
‘The main clause of the sentence ‘kill the polytheists’ is singled out by some Western scholars to represent the Islamic attitude to war; even some Muslims take this view and allege that this verse abrogated other verses on war. This is pure fantasy, isolating and decontextualising a small part of a sentence.
‘The full picture is given in 9:1–15, which gives many reasons for the order to fight such polytheists. They continuously broke their agreements and aided others against the Muslims, they started hostilities against the Muslims, barred others from becoming Muslims, expelled Muslims from the Holy Mosque and even from their own homes. At least eight times the passage mentions their misdeeds against the Muslims.
‘Consistent with restrictions on war elsewhere in the Qur’an, the immediate context of this ‘Sword Verse’ exempts such polytheists as do not break their agreements and who keep the peace with the Muslims (9:7). It orders that those enemies seeking safe conduct should be protected and delivered to the place of safety they seek (9:6). The whole of this context to v.5, with all its restrictions, is ignored by those who simply isolate one part of a sentence to build their theory of war in Islam.’ (‘Understanding the Qur’an – Themes and Style’).
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
The Qur’an advocates opposition to aggression and oppression. However, war is allowed ONLY as an act of self-defence, and NEVER as an act of aggression.
‘Those who have been attacked are permitted to take up arms because they have been wronged – Allāh has the power to help them – those who have been driven unjustly from their homes only for saying: “Our Lord is Allāh .” If Allāh did not repel some people by means of others, many monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, where Allāh ’s name is much invoked, would have been destroyed. Allāh is sure to help those who help His cause – Allāh is strong and mighty…..’ (Al-Hajj: Verses 39-40).
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
Continued:
This is the so-called ‘Sword Verse’ (an ironic title, since the word ‘sword’ does not occur in the Qur’an).
Since the tenth century certain Islamic scholars have claimed that this verse abrogated many Qur’anic verses, including those that permitted Muslims to deal fairly towards non-Muslims, and to live peacefully with them.
The majority of scholars deny this claim. However, this does not prevent militant Islamists – and hostile non-Muslims – using the verse, either to justify their atrocities – in the case of the former – or their attacks on Islam – in the case of the latter.
Here is the verse (in its setting, and emphasised):
‘A release by Allāh and His Messenger from the treaty you (believers) made with the idolaters (is announced) – you (idolaters) may move freely about the land for four months, but you should bear in mind both that you will not escape Allāh and that Allāh will disgrace those who defy (Him). On the Day of the Great Pilgrimage (there will be) a proclamation from Allāh and His Messenger to all people: ‘Allāh and His Messenger are released from (treaty) obligations to the idolaters. It will be better for you (idolaters) if you repent; know that you cannot escape Allāh if you turn away.’ (Prophet), warn those who ignore (Allāh) that they will have a painful punishment. As for those who have honoured the treaty you made with them and who have not supported anyone against you: fulfil your agreement with them to the end of their term. Allāh loves those who are mindful of Him.’ (Verses 1-4).
‘When the (four) forbidden months are over, wherever you encounter the idolaters, kill them, seize them, besiege them, wait for them at every lookout post; but if they turn (to Allāh), maintain the prayer, and pay the prescribed alms, let them go on their way, for Allāh is most forgiving and merciful.’ (Verse 5)
‘If any one of the idolaters should seek your protection (Prophet), grant it to him so that he may hear the word of Allāh, then take him to a place safe for him, for they are people with no knowledge (of it). How could there be a treaty with Allāh and His Messenger for such idolaters? But as for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque, so long as they remain true to you, be true to them; Allāh loves those who are mindful of Him.’ (Verses 6-7).
‘(How,) when, if they were to get the upper hand over you, they would not respect any tie with you, of kinship or of treaty? They please you with their tongues, but their hearts are against you and most of them are lawbreakers. They have sold Allāh’s message for a trifling gain, and barred others from His path. How evil their actions are! Where believers are concerned, they respect no tie of kinship or treaty. They are the ones who are committing aggression. If they turn to Allāh, keep up the prayer, and pay the prescribed alms, then they are your brothers in faith: We make the messages clear for people who are willing to learn. But if they break their oath after having made an agreement with you, if they revile your religion, then fight the leaders of disbelief – oaths mean nothing to them – so that they may stop. How could you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, who tried to drive the Messenger out, who attacked you first? Do you fear them? It is Allāh you should fear if you are true believers.’ (Verses 8-13).
Let’s look more closely at a number of these verses:
Verse 1 announces the annulment of a treaty (possibly the Treaty of Ḥudaybiyah) between the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and the Quraysh.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr informs us that: ‘Among (the various tribes) were the Banū Khuzāʿah on the side of the Prophet and Banū Bakr on the side of the Quraysh. Banū Bakr later launched an attack on the Banū Khuzāʿah, stemming from a vendetta that preexisted the Treaty of Ḥudaybiyah, and it was reported that the Quraysh assisted the Banū Bakr with arms and a small number of men.
‘The Prophet considered this act to be a breach of the treaty, thereby nullifying the need to observe the truce, and this ultimately led to the final conquest of Makkah by the Prophet and his followers. According to this account, the repudiation of the treaty is addressed to the Makkans.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary’).
Nasr goes on to say that a majority of commentators opine that verse 1 was revealed a year after the breach of the Treaty; and that there is a ‘considerable difference of opinion as to which idolaters are addressed and the legal import of both the repudiation (v. 1) and the announcement (v. 3).’
Either way, verse 4 (‘As for those who have honoured the treaty you made with them and who have not supported anyone against you: fulfil your agreement with them to the end of their term. Allāh loves those who are mindful of Him.’) commands the Muslims to honour any peace treaty they have with those (disbelievers) who have also honoured their obligations, and who have not supported military action against the Muslims.
Verse 6: (‘If any one of the idolaters should seek your protection (Prophet), grant it to him so that he may hear the word of Allāh, then take him to a place safe for him….’) makes it perfectly clear that the Muslims are not to consider a peaceful disbeliever an enemy. Allāh (Subḥānahu ūta'āla) goes further, and commands the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) to give his protection to any non-Muslim who seeks his help, and to deliver them to a place of safety.
Verses 7-8 refer to the hostile attitude of Meccan idolaters who cared nothing for kinship, and who initiated acts of aggression. It is because of this that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) is released from his treaty obligations.
Verse 11 commands the Muslims to forgive those polytheists who honour their treaties, and to live in peace with them. Should any of the polytheist chose to accept Islam, they are to be treated as brothers.
Verse 13 urges the Muslims to fight aggression. They are reminded that it was the polytheists who broke the treaty they had with them.
And now for verse 5:
You will note – I trust – that this verse refers only to the polytheists of Mecca (the Quraysh), whose long-standing fitna (persecution) of the Muslims grew so great that the Quraysh were determined to convert the Muslims back to paganism, or else finish them off.
Muhammad Abdel Haleem states (correctly) that Al-Tawba 5 is: ‘Much referred to but notoriously misinterpreted and taken out of context.’
He goes on:
‘It was these hardened polytheists in Arabia, who would accept nothing other than the expulsion of the Muslims or their reversion to paganism, and who repeatedly broke their treaties, that the Muslims were ordered to treat in the same way – to fight them or expel them.
‘Even with such an enemy Muslims were not simply ordered to pounce on them and reciprocate by breaking the treaty themselves; instead, an ultimatum was issued, giving the enemy notice, that after the four sacred months mentioned in v.9:5 above, the Muslims would wage war on them.
‘The main clause of the sentence ‘kill the polytheists’ is singled out by some Western scholars to represent the Islamic attitude to war; even some Muslims take this view and allege that this verse abrogated other verses on war. This is pure fantasy, isolating and decontextualising a small part of a sentence.
‘The full picture is given in 9:1–15, which gives many reasons for the order to fight such polytheists. They continuously broke their agreements and aided others against the Muslims, they started hostilities against the Muslims, barred others from becoming Muslims, expelled Muslims from the Holy Mosque and even from their own homes. At least eight times the passage mentions their misdeeds against the Muslims.
‘Consistent with restrictions on war elsewhere in the Qur’an, the immediate context of this ‘Sword Verse’ exempts such polytheists as do not break their agreements and who keep the peace with the Muslims (9:7). It orders that those enemies seeking safe conduct should be protected and delivered to the place of safety they seek (9:6). The whole of this context to v.5, with all its restrictions, is ignored by those who simply isolate one part of a sentence to build their theory of war in Islam.’ (‘Understanding the Qur’an – Themes and Style’).
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
The Qur’an advocates opposition to aggression and oppression. However, war is allowed ONLY as an act of self-defence, and NEVER as an act of aggression.
‘Those who have been attacked are permitted to take up arms because they have been wronged – Allāh has the power to help them – those who have been driven unjustly from their homes only for saying: “Our Lord is Allāh .” If Allāh did not repel some people by means of others, many monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, where Allāh ’s name is much invoked, would have been destroyed. Allāh is sure to help those who help His cause – Allāh is strong and mighty…..’ (Al-Hajj: Verses 39-40).
Where in these verses does Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) sanction ‘world conquest by the sword’?
Continued:
I refer you to the book: ‘Fatwa on Terrorism and Suicide Bombings’ by Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri. In his introduction to this book, Dr Joel S. Hayward – Dean of the Royal Air Force College, Cranwell, and Head of Air Power Studies, King’s College London – writes (my emphasis):
‘In March 2010 I breathed a huge sigh of relief when I read that an internationally renowned Islamic scholar, recognised throughout the world as an authority on the Qur’an and the Sunna, had issued a prodigiously researched fatwa which demonstrated from scrupulously reliable sources that terrorism and suicide bombings are so wickedly unjust and un-Islamic that their evil cannot be justified by recourse to discussions of intention.
‘The Shaykh’s scholarship is remarkable. The fatwa rests upon a granite-solid foundation of research and references from the Qur’an, reliable Hadith of established provenance, opinions of the Beloved Prophet’s Companions and the classical texts of Islamic scholarship that are widely accepted by all main schools of thought………Carefully selected for their reliability and clarity, the citations are employed by the Shaykh with obvious and commendable scholarly concern for precision and accuracy and after all issues of truth, objectivity and bias have been carefully weighed on the scales of his mind. In selecting sources, building his case brick-by-brick and expressing his argument powerfully and clearly, he has demonstrated profoundly good judgment.
‘(The Shaykh) has left no stone unturned in his determination to demonstrate that there can be no possible justification for deliberate violence in the name of Islam outside of the context of organised warfare. This is itself only permissible when undertaken according to strict criteria based only on self-defence and adherence to justice…..Indeed, the Shaykh demonstrates that suicide bombings and other forms of terrorism are so unjust and wicked that they place the perpetrators outside of Islam. That is, these acts are the acts of unbelievers, not martyrs, and they will expose those who do them to the gravest likelihood of eternal punishment after death.’
The following chapters from the Shaykh’s Fatwa, and their content, are relevant to our topic:
Chapter 3: The Unlawfulness of Indiscriminately Killing Non-Muslims and Torturing Them
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
That there must be no discrimination between the killings of Muslim and non-Muslim citizens; that the massacre of civilian population and considering it lawful is an act of disbelief; that the killing of non-Muslim citizens makes paradise forbidden for the killer; that the killing foreign delegates and religious leaders is unlawful; that the retribution (qisas) of Muslims and non-Muslims is the same; the unlawfulness of harming a non-Muslim citizen out of revenge; the unlawfulness of usurping the wealth of non-Muslims; that humiliating non-Muslim citizens is forbidden’; and non-Muslim citizens must be protected from from internal and external aggression.
Chapter 4: The Unlawfulness of Terrorism Against non-Muslims – Even During Times of War
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
The unlawfulness of killing non-Muslim women; of killing the children of non-Muslims; of killing elderly non-Muslims; of killing the religious leaders of non-Muslims; of killing non-Muslim traders and farmers; of killing non-Muslim service personnel; of killing non-Muslims who are non-combatants; of waging night offensives against non-Muslims; of burning non-Muslims; of breaking into enemy homes and looting them; of destroying the cattle, crops and properties of the enemy.
Chapter 5: On the Protection of the non-Muslims’ Lives, Properties and Places of Worship
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
The protection of non-Muslim citizens during the time of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam); and of the protection of non-Muslim citizens during the reigns of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq; ‘Umar bin al-Khattab; ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan; ‘Ali bin Abi Talib; and ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (radi Allahu ‘anhum).
Chapter 6: The Unlawfulness of Forcing One’s Belief Upon Others and Destroying Places of Worship
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
The complete freedom to practise one’s religion; the unlawfulness of killing a non-Muslim and destroying his or her property due to religious differences; that it is a Sunna of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam to safeguard non-Muslim places of worship; that it is a religious obligation to safeguard these places of worship; and the unlawfulness of destroying the non-Muslim places of worship located in Muslim-majority areas
What fascinates me about your claim – that the Qur’an sanctions ‘world conquest by the sword' – is the moral mindset that makes you – and others like you – seemingly impervious to objective evidence.
Continued:
‘In March 2010 I breathed a huge sigh of relief when I read that an internationally renowned Islamic scholar, recognised throughout the world as an authority on the Qur’an and the Sunna, had issued a prodigiously researched fatwa which demonstrated from scrupulously reliable sources that terrorism and suicide bombings are so wickedly unjust and un-Islamic that their evil cannot be justified by recourse to discussions of intention.
‘The Shaykh’s scholarship is remarkable. The fatwa rests upon a granite-solid foundation of research and references from the Qur’an, reliable Hadith of established provenance, opinions of the Beloved Prophet’s Companions and the classical texts of Islamic scholarship that are widely accepted by all main schools of thought………Carefully selected for their reliability and clarity, the citations are employed by the Shaykh with obvious and commendable scholarly concern for precision and accuracy and after all issues of truth, objectivity and bias have been carefully weighed on the scales of his mind. In selecting sources, building his case brick-by-brick and expressing his argument powerfully and clearly, he has demonstrated profoundly good judgment.
‘(The Shaykh) has left no stone unturned in his determination to demonstrate that there can be no possible justification for deliberate violence in the name of Islam outside of the context of organised warfare. This is itself only permissible when undertaken according to strict criteria based only on self-defence and adherence to justice…..Indeed, the Shaykh demonstrates that suicide bombings and other forms of terrorism are so unjust and wicked that they place the perpetrators outside of Islam. That is, these acts are the acts of unbelievers, not martyrs, and they will expose those who do them to the gravest likelihood of eternal punishment after death.’
The following chapters from the Shaykh’s Fatwa, and their content, are relevant to our topic:
Chapter 3: The Unlawfulness of Indiscriminately Killing Non-Muslims and Torturing Them
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
That there must be no discrimination between the killings of Muslim and non-Muslim citizens; that the massacre of civilian population and considering it lawful is an act of disbelief; that the killing of non-Muslim citizens makes paradise forbidden for the killer; that the killing foreign delegates and religious leaders is unlawful; that the retribution (qisas) of Muslims and non-Muslims is the same; the unlawfulness of harming a non-Muslim citizen out of revenge; the unlawfulness of usurping the wealth of non-Muslims; that humiliating non-Muslim citizens is forbidden’; and non-Muslim citizens must be protected from from internal and external aggression.
Chapter 4: The Unlawfulness of Terrorism Against non-Muslims – Even During Times of War
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
The unlawfulness of killing non-Muslim women; of killing the children of non-Muslims; of killing elderly non-Muslims; of killing the religious leaders of non-Muslims; of killing non-Muslim traders and farmers; of killing non-Muslim service personnel; of killing non-Muslims who are non-combatants; of waging night offensives against non-Muslims; of burning non-Muslims; of breaking into enemy homes and looting them; of destroying the cattle, crops and properties of the enemy.
Chapter 5: On the Protection of the non-Muslims’ Lives, Properties and Places of Worship
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
The protection of non-Muslim citizens during the time of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam); and of the protection of non-Muslim citizens during the reigns of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq; ‘Umar bin al-Khattab; ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan; ‘Ali bin Abi Talib; and ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (radi Allahu ‘anhum).
Chapter 6: The Unlawfulness of Forcing One’s Belief Upon Others and Destroying Places of Worship
In this chapter, the Shaykh demonstrates – with supporting evidence from the Qur’an and ʼaḥādīth:
The complete freedom to practise one’s religion; the unlawfulness of killing a non-Muslim and destroying his or her property due to religious differences; that it is a Sunna of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam to safeguard non-Muslim places of worship; that it is a religious obligation to safeguard these places of worship; and the unlawfulness of destroying the non-Muslim places of worship located in Muslim-majority areas
What fascinates me about your claim – that the Qur’an sanctions ‘world conquest by the sword' – is the moral mindset that makes you – and others like you – seemingly impervious to objective evidence.
Continued:
I asked you: ‘Whereabouts in the Qur'an is the Messiah replaced by the Mahdi?’
You have yet to answer this question. Please allow me to help you out:
The answer is ‘Nowhere.’
The Qur’an make no mention of the Mahdi.
In Christianity – as you know the anti-Christ comes first to deceive the world. Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) comes after the anti-Christ.
Islam agrees. The anti-Christ is named as al-Masīḥ ad-Dajjāl (‘the false messiah, liar, the deceiver, the deceiving messiah'). The Qur’an itself does not refer to such a person, or to a millennium of any description.
According to Sunni eschatology, this man will live for a little over a year, before being killed by Yeshua.
According to some, this will take place in Lod (near Tel Aviv); others that it will occur at Afiq (near the Sea of Galilee).
Marcia Hermansen writes:
‘Given the great interpretive diversity within Islam and the absence of a central institution that might limit and define authoritative doctrine, throughout Islamic intellectual history the tension between literal approaches to revelation and the interpretive limitations of human reason as respective sources of truth has been a recognised constant.
‘It would therefore be futile to present Muslim theological positions on eschatology as if there were a consensus regarding each detail of what is expected at the end of time. By their very nature, eschatological doctrines test the limits of our rational and customary experience, thereby reminding us of the fragility of our attachment to conditions that strike us now as unquestionably real.’ (‘The Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology’).
Islamic puritans believe that Yeshua (as Messiah) will destroy both Christianity and Judaism (and anyone else who does not share their perception of Islam). This is a direct contradiction of the Qur’an.
Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) tells us: ‘We have assigned a law and a path to each of you. If Allāh had so willed, He would have made you one community, but He wanted to test you through that which He has given you, so race to do good: you will all return to Allāh and He will make clear to you the matters you differed about.’ (Al-Ma’ida: 48).
The Beloved never refers to Christians and Jews as ‘mushrikun’ (‘polytheists’, or ‘idolaters’). He refers to them as ‘Ahl al-kitab’ (the ‘People of the Book’ – an honorific title). This is what He has to say about those who are true to their religion:
‘Those who believe, and do good deeds, are the best of creation. Their reward with their Lord is everlasting Gardens graced with flowing streams, where they will stay forever. Allāh is well pleased with them and they with Him. All this is for those who stand in awe of their Lord.’ (Al-Bayyina: 7-8; my emphasis).
Take especial note of these verses. I was a Christian for over sixty-five years. It has been my privilege to know – and to love – many Christians who were shining examples of Christian love and good practice. These verses assure me that they shall have their reward in Heaven; that every Christian, and every Jew, who carries the Beloved in their hearts, and who strives to do good, will have their reward. This is a solemn promise, and the Beloved does not renege on His promises.
Although these verses are addressing those Jews and Christians who believe in Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla), and who express their belief in works, they apply also to those Muslims who do likewise.
Belief, in this context, is the child of faith – of trust, if you like. It is not a passive state of mind, but an active one. It has to be enacted, otherwise it is meaningless. This is what St Paul meant when he wrote that ‘faith without works is dead’.
You have yet to answer this question. Please allow me to help you out:
The answer is ‘Nowhere.’
The Qur’an make no mention of the Mahdi.
In Christianity – as you know the anti-Christ comes first to deceive the world. Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) comes after the anti-Christ.
Islam agrees. The anti-Christ is named as al-Masīḥ ad-Dajjāl (‘the false messiah, liar, the deceiver, the deceiving messiah'). The Qur’an itself does not refer to such a person, or to a millennium of any description.
According to Sunni eschatology, this man will live for a little over a year, before being killed by Yeshua.
According to some, this will take place in Lod (near Tel Aviv); others that it will occur at Afiq (near the Sea of Galilee).
Marcia Hermansen writes:
‘Given the great interpretive diversity within Islam and the absence of a central institution that might limit and define authoritative doctrine, throughout Islamic intellectual history the tension between literal approaches to revelation and the interpretive limitations of human reason as respective sources of truth has been a recognised constant.
‘It would therefore be futile to present Muslim theological positions on eschatology as if there were a consensus regarding each detail of what is expected at the end of time. By their very nature, eschatological doctrines test the limits of our rational and customary experience, thereby reminding us of the fragility of our attachment to conditions that strike us now as unquestionably real.’ (‘The Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology’).
Islamic puritans believe that Yeshua (as Messiah) will destroy both Christianity and Judaism (and anyone else who does not share their perception of Islam). This is a direct contradiction of the Qur’an.
Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) tells us: ‘We have assigned a law and a path to each of you. If Allāh had so willed, He would have made you one community, but He wanted to test you through that which He has given you, so race to do good: you will all return to Allāh and He will make clear to you the matters you differed about.’ (Al-Ma’ida: 48).
The Beloved never refers to Christians and Jews as ‘mushrikun’ (‘polytheists’, or ‘idolaters’). He refers to them as ‘Ahl al-kitab’ (the ‘People of the Book’ – an honorific title). This is what He has to say about those who are true to their religion:
‘Those who believe, and do good deeds, are the best of creation. Their reward with their Lord is everlasting Gardens graced with flowing streams, where they will stay forever. Allāh is well pleased with them and they with Him. All this is for those who stand in awe of their Lord.’ (Al-Bayyina: 7-8; my emphasis).
Take especial note of these verses. I was a Christian for over sixty-five years. It has been my privilege to know – and to love – many Christians who were shining examples of Christian love and good practice. These verses assure me that they shall have their reward in Heaven; that every Christian, and every Jew, who carries the Beloved in their hearts, and who strives to do good, will have their reward. This is a solemn promise, and the Beloved does not renege on His promises.
Although these verses are addressing those Jews and Christians who believe in Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla), and who express their belief in works, they apply also to those Muslims who do likewise.
Belief, in this context, is the child of faith – of trust, if you like. It is not a passive state of mind, but an active one. It has to be enacted, otherwise it is meaningless. This is what St Paul meant when he wrote that ‘faith without works is dead’.
So you deny that Mohammed himself took the sword in conquest for Allah and conquered many cities by bloodshed, and that Islam seeks a world-wide caliphate, and in fact made war all through Europe, conquering parts of Spain, took over the Christian city Constantinople with the sword and made it into a Muslim city and destroyed all the churches, among many other examples of that?
The Islamic conquest of the world was only stopped by a series of crusades, and in fact ISIS was the Muslim attempt to recreate a caliphate, and today that dictator in Turkey seeks to reestablish Turkey as caliphate headquarters again, just as it was when it was broken up in the 1940s.
Islam comes with the ideology of world conquest by any means possible- if by immigration and expanding their population for control, well and good - but if necessary, the sword.
Here’s some facts about the “religion of peace” - actions speak louder than denial:
The early Muslim conquests (Arabic: الفتوحات الإسلامية, al-Futūḥāt al-Islāmiyya), also referred to as the Arab conquests[4] and the early Islamic conquests[5] began with the Islamic prophet Muhammad in the 7th century. He established a new unified polity in the Arabian Peninsula which under the subsequent Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphatessaw a century of rapid expansion.
Early Muslim conquests
Expansion from 622–750, with modern borders overlaid
Date 622–750
Location
Levant, Mesopotamia, Persia, North Africa, Iberia, Gaul, Transoxania, Sindh, Kabulistan, Zamindawar, Zabulistan, Khorasan, Tukharistan, Sistan and Caucasus
Territorial
changes
Islamic expansion:
under Muhammad, 622–632
under Rashidun caliphs, 632–661
under Umayyad caliphs, 661–750
The resulting empire stretched from parts of Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent, across the Middle East, North Africa, the Caucasus, and parts of Southwest Europe (Sicily and the Iberian Peninsula to the Pyrenees). Edward Gibbon writes in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire:
The Muslim conquests brought about the collapse of the Sassanid Empireand a great territorial loss for the Byzantine Empire. The reasons for the Muslim success are hard to reconstruct in hindsight, primarily because only fragmentary sources from the period have survived. Fred McGraw Donner suggests that formation of a state in the Arabian peninsula and ideological (i.e., religious) coherence and mobilization was a primary reason why the Muslim armies in the space of a hundred years were able to establish one of the largest pre-modern empires until that time. Estimates of the total area of the combined territory held by the Islamic Caliphate at its peak have been as high as thirteen million square kilometers, or five million square miles.[6]
Last edited:
Similar threads
