Can Islam Be Defeated?

Two of the questions I am most often asked are, “Why does Islam seem so attractive to converts?” and “Can Islam be defeated?” Not surprisingly, these two questions are interrelated.

There are many elements to Islam that attract Western converts today, including its seeming clarity on right/wrong, its unwavering commitment to monotheism and its appeal to anti-Jewish and anti-Christian sentiments in our post-Christian culture. But I believe there is an even greater appeal to the heart of fallen human nature.

In the New Testament, the apostle Paul speaks of the fallen human heart as the life of the “flesh.” This stands in opposition to “life in the Spirit,” the new nature born in the human heart upon conversion to Christ, when the Spirit of God takes up residence within a person’s spirit and begins transforming him/her into the likeness of Jesus Christ, a lifelong process theologians refer to as “sanctification.”

Islam knows no such process, because it does not believe that human nature is fallen or inherently flawed by a sinful bent, but teaches instead that humans tend to be forgetful and just need regular reminders that their rightful role in life is submission as slaves to Allah. As such, Islam has no equivalent to Paul’s teaching that believers are to “put to death whatever belongs to your earthly nature” (Col. 3:5; see also Rom. 8:13), but rather proposes that our natural earthly desires are to be harnessed in service to a very “fleshly” Allah.

Islam is such a powerful movement because it is the perfect religion to appeal to the flesh. Our fallen hearts naturally lust after the fulfillment of certain basic cravings. Chief among these are three: ego (hubris); power; pleasure. In our natural state, we want to favorably compare ourselves to others, to show that we are better than those around us; we want power to be able to shape the world for our benefit or according to our whims and appetites; we want to enjoy a variety of pleasures the world affords and avoid its pains. Islam caters to these cravings.

As to hubris, the Qur’an teaches Muslims that they are “the best of all peoples ever raised up for mankind” (3:110), and that by contrast the rest of the world (all those who reject Islam, including Christians, Jews, pagans, etc.) are “the worst of all creatures” in Allah’s sight (98:6).  This theme woven throughout the Qur’an has produced the supremacist attitude so apparent in Islamic thought down through the centuries, an attitude central to its drive to conquer the world so as to justify the belief that Islam is better than any alternative and that Muslims are better than all non-Muslims.

As to power, Islam preaches a god of absolute might and sovereignty who routinely resorts to force when his creatures refuse to willingly comply with his will. The cry of Muslim armies, Muslim terrorists, and Muslim protagonists all over the world, Allahu akbar, does not mean “God is great,” as so many mistranslate it, but rather “God is greater!” It is not merely a metaphysical claim about a certain god, but rather an in-your-face challenge to all who follow someone or something other than the god of Islam. “Our Allah is greater than whatever you cherish and value most highly, and we will wipe your idols off the throne of your lives and replace them with Allah, if you don’t voluntarily submit to Islam.” The Qur’an calls Muslims to “kill and be killed” for the cause of Allah (9:111), and Allah promises his warriors supernatural aid (angels will fight alongside them and strengthen them) so that twenty jihadis will defeat two hundred infidels, and a hundred will defeat a thousand (8:65). According to Islam, the true prophets have always fought and killed for the advancement of Allah’s kingdom. In Sura 8:67, Muhammad declares (as Allah’s mouthpiece), “It is not for a prophet to have captives [of war] until he inflicts a massacre [upon Allah ‘s enemies] in the land.” Allah harnesses the fallen human heart’s penchant for power over others by givingMuslims free rein to slaughter all who will not bow before Islam’s command to submit to Allah. Such violent compulsion is not a sin when used in Allah’s cause.

Lastly, with regard to pleasure, Islam gives Muslim men (who are the masters of their women and children that, as a result. have no say in the matter) the booty they collect from their wars against unbelievers, both in terms of material goods and those they have captured as slaves. Slaves can be sold off for financial gain or kept for service. Conquered females can be turned into sex slaves, whether married or virgin. These are part and parcel of the “benefits” Allah grants his faithful jihadis. But of course the greatest pleasure he promises his devotees is that if they are faithful enough to him on earth, he will grant them entrance to an eternal paradise on the Day of Judgment. And what characterizes this Paradise? All the earthly pleasures a fallen heart could ever desire: gardens filled with an unlimited variety of fruit-bearing trees, watered by streams of clear water, wholesome milk, pure honey and robust wine flowing between shaded banks covered with soft mossy rises; an abundance of foods considered rare delicacies in the desert reaches of Arabia; boys available as servants to do the Muslim master’s bidding, whatever that might be; houris (young, beautiful, buxom virgins created by Allah for the dwellers of Paradise, women panting with desire for their respective masters and available at a moment’s notice for sexual coupling, after which they miraculously return to their virginal state (Muslim commentators differ on the minimum number of houris assigned to each Muslim man in Paradise, from dozens to thousands), and if you think that this sexual gymnasium might become tiresome, there are commentators quick to assure readers that in Paradise Muslim men will be capable of ceaseless erections. Allah, of course, is not present, because in his loftiness he cannot condescend to hobnob with his rutting subjects, but he has provided them this erotic elysium as a reward for their unflagging service on earth.

Why does Islam appeal to so many in the West today? Because it gives divine approval to the pursuit of our sinful passions, making them virtuous: it encourages hubris by stroking the egos of Muslims, declaring them the best of humans in Allah’s eyes; it commands them to wield the sword and enjoy their divinely-bestowed power by lording their authority over non-Muslims, demanding that infidels serve them and accept an inferior status before their Muslim overlords; and it promises them unlimited fulfillment of the appetites of the flesh — what they can’t win for themselves through conquest on earth, Allah will supply in spades in heaven, all to be enjoyed without the least tinge of a wounded conscience.

Islam is the perfect religion of the flesh, even if it does promote the death of its followers. Death is only the gateway to infinite enjoyment of carnal pleasures.

Can such a religion be defeated? The answer, of course, is yes. But can Islam be defeated by Western civilization as it now stands? I’m afraid the answer to that is no. The post-Christian West has lost the compelling reason for its existence. We still enjoy many of the fruits of the biblical worldview that inspired the fundamentals of Western thought: the notion that all human beings are created in the image of God and therefore of equal value and dignity, and imbued with certain inalienable rights, things we today call “human rights.” Yet as Western civilization has become increasingly secular in the last two hundred years, we have consciously undermined the metaphysical framework on which our freedoms and successes were built, and assumed that the structure would remain standing. We want to enjoy the good values and practices we have, but can no longer find the deep justifications for why they must exist. We are like the inhabitants of a great tree that is dying, still enjoying the dwindling fruit that remain on its branches, wondering why the tree is so sickly as all the while we are chopping away at the base of the trunk in the desire to gather wood for our huts in the branches. We have mindlessly cut ourselves off from the life-giving roots of our majestic tree, but continue to pick the diminishing fruit and hope vainly that the tree will somehow regain her strength.

America and Europe have squandered the legacy of a worldview that brought untold blessing to humanity. We have let slip through our fingers the majestic and profound truths upon which the best of human society has been built: that the God of all creation made human beings as the apple of His eye, and stamped our spirits with His image and likeness; that this God is Love Himself, and from Him flow all things good; that He made us for a relationship with Himself and for one another, to know Him intimately and to live in  love as brothers and sisters; that sin has destroyed this harmony which will only be fully restored by His self-sacrifice to repair the breach caused by human evil; that His incarnation as one of us to bear our sins and draw us to Himself has turned the tide against evil; that we are invited to enjoy the fullness of His redeeming love and to share that with all the world until He returns to bring all things to their appointed end and cleanse His creation once and for all of evil.

This worldview once empowered our forebears and became the foundation of the greatness of Western culture and civilization. But we have gradually walked away from that and replaced it with secular humanism, a notion that there is no God behind this world, that we just exist as human beings with inherent rights granted us by a lifeless, mindless, random universe of mass and energy. We want desperately to believe that we matter, that all human beings matter, that concepts like justice, mercy, kindness, freedom, and love have inherent worth and value, but if in the end we are all just products of random acts of a mindless and uncaring universe, why should anyone care about anyone else, or about “enduring moral principles”? For in the end, everything will blink out of existence in the same way as it randomly came into existence. We may rage against the night for the brief moment of our existence, but soon enough the night wins.

Secular humanism has been hacking away at the trunk of Western civilization for quite a while now. I saw a sad but telling example of this a few months ago in the suburbs of London. Having an afternoon off on a rainy day, I took a hike along the banks of the Thames River till I came upon the town of Teddington in Middlesex. Deciding to follow the pathway into town, I spied a beautiful church rising above the nearby roofs and trees, and determined to spend some time inside. As I walked completely around the perimeter, I could find no main entrance into the sanctuary, only a side entrance into an area called the “Landmark Arts Centre,” where a few people were coming and going. Finally, not seeing any alternative, I walked through that entrance and spoke with a very helpful attendant at the welcome desk. “Isn’t this a church?” I asked. “May I see the sanctuary?”

Former sanctuary of the Church of St. Alban the Martyr

“Oh, no, I’m sorry,” she said. “This hasn’t been a church since the 1990s. It now serves as space for our Landmark Arts Centre, which hosts art displays and social dinners and concerts as part of our effort to support local artists.” I discovered in further conversation and research that the original structure, Church of St. Alban the Martyr was built and dedicated to the glory of God in 1889. Though never formally designated a “cathedral,” it became known informally as “The Cathedral of the Thames Valley.” It is indeed a majestic building, reflecting the religious gratitude of multitudes in constructing such a monument to the grace of God.

However, as British society grew more secular and indifferent to things Christian, St. Alban’s disbanded as a congregation in 1977 (only 90 years after the cornerstone had been laid!) and the building was declared “redundant” (don’t you just love British terminology? — it means “superfluous/no longer needed”). Once a glorious edifice, St. Alban’s deteriorated for some 15 years as a derelict building until locals formed a “robust campaign” to see it restored as an English Heritage site in the 1990s. And so today, the Church of St. Alban the Martyr no longer exists, but has been replaced by the Landmarks Art Centre.

Here’s what the former sanctuary looked like the day I visited in November 2017.

A sad, real-life parable reflecting what has been going on in Western civilization as a whole. The original purpose of the structure has been lost, and it now serves a small enterprise that cannot give meaning to that original architectural masterpiece. A cathedral built for the glory of God now fronts as a warehouse to view paintings and sculptures.

Secular humanism cannot breathe meaning and purpose into a civilization built upon a biblical worldview. It can seek to maintain the structure for a while, as it has in America, but sooner or later the grand architecture of rights and blessings we have enjoyed due to the out-working of the gospel will weigh too heavily on the small enterprise of humanism, and post-Christian civilization will collapse upon itself.

So, can Western civilization defeat Islam? Hardly. It is having a hard enough time standing on its own two feet to resist a secular worldview intent on knocking it over. Certainly, the Western world has enough military power and political resources to restrain the world of Muslim nations and radical jihadi groups, but mere force cannot destroy Islam as an ideology or worldview. Secular humanism is a lightweight against the juggernaut of Islam, which is not just a set of religious beliefs but an all-encompassing worldview, informing the whole of life for its adherents. What is needed to defeat Islam is exactly what the West has jettisoned — an embrace of the worldview of Christianity.

To defeat a strong worldview necessitates an even stronger one. What is stronger than a god of hate if not a God of love? What is better than a god who uses and commands brutal force than a God who exhibits and commands self-sacrifice? What is stronger, a god who harnesses the power of temptation to advance his cause, or a God who defeats the power of sin so as to rescue human beings for a higher calling? What is stronger, a god who promises to reward those who kill and are killed in his name, or a God who conquers death by His own death, in order to offer eternal life as a gift to those who come in gratitude? What is a greater worldview: one that commands love for Muslims and hatred for infidels, or one that commands love for all neighbors, including enemies?

The religion of Islam will one day crumble into oblivion, because it is built upon a worldly spirituality that opposes the true Kingdom of God as revealed in and through Jesus Christ. It will not be other earthly powers that defeat Islam, whether military, political or religious. Only the Church has the message that sounds the death knell of Islam — but it won’t happen primarily by a frontal attack on its tenets and practices. It will come about by the conversions of massive numbers of Muslims who discover that the message of the gospel shines with a light and love and truth which Islam has never been able to match, for all its efforts.

Already, over the last forty years Muslims have been leaving Islam in droves. Many turn first to atheism, thinking that if the “final religion given to man” has proven untenable, then no religion can be true. But thousands upon thousands are being exposed to the gospel for the first time in their lives, and discovering to their irrepressible joy that the Arabian prophet cannot hold a candle to the Son of God.

Can Islam be defeated? Yes, and it will be, but only when the Church wakes up once again to her true Love, and lives out her mission with a passion to love and reach the lost, including 1.6 billion Muslims! If the last forty years are indicative of what God holds for the future, the tide is already turning.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to Can Islam Be Defeated?

  1. jim gill says:

    Thank you Mateen.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Heidi Rajan says:

    More help in understanding our work as witnesses of Jesus Christ. Thank you very much.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Parson Brown says:

    Your blog is about the only one that I try to read every time it comes out. Thank you for your ministry to all of us. I need your teaching to share my Gospel life more wisely than I could without your insights, Mateen.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Shaquille says:

    what a load of rubbish. I am a muslim, and this article is overblown biased rubbish. Islam constantly exhorts a person to purify themselves and restrain their desires in this world. Carnal pleasure and that which is forbidden in this world (the things that give a human great satisfaction such as sex) are not prohibited in the next world that much is true. A human being created from clay must exist the same in the next world or he/she is no longer the same person with human attributes. The Quran constantly exhorts muslims to prayer, fasting, charity and humility moreso than any other acts. To deny a human beings fundamental nature for food warmth and sex is denying reality and that which makes us human. It is interesting to note that few christians are celibate, Paul sees marriage almost as a crime, in the least a necessary evil to restrain a persons desires. The author seriously lacks an understanding of Islam and needs to remove her prejudiced filter if she is to evaluate Islam properly. As for describing a ‘superiority complex’ – if you really have the truth from God and you are following his commands it follows that you are the ones on the right path and hence must be better than the rest of mankind as God has given his approvsl for your behaviour. Whereas if you have doubt in your faith or it is not made clear that you are on the truth you would never make such a claim. Islam is a confident religion, confident in its truth without the doubts and insecurities exhibited by other religions and gives its followers the esteem and honour that God has bestowed on him/her if you follow Gods commands. Despite the huge negative attention and media brainwashing, converts go well against the tide and convert to Islam because they see what you do not, they dont have the biases and prejudices that most people hold and if they do they have a rude awakening as to the truth in that epiphany of a moment. Its strange you would like to see Islam defeated. Islam is the only religion that can withstand the western onslaught against it. Islam is the last vanguard for all religions against the ceasless attacks of the atheist secularists. Christianity has already been relegated to the sidelines, it is in severe decline, despite your optimism and religions like Hinduism us treated as cultural superstition and so of no threat at all to secular ideology. It would have been nice for you to at the very least commend Islam for its pure monotheism, its confirmation of Jesus’s virgin birth, its confirmation of previous prophets etc etc. Articles like yours will have the faithful (or what is left) rejoicing with optimism that Christianity will stem its loss of believers somehow. Lastly it amazes me as to the vitriol Christians spew out against Islam – when muslims actually speak well of christians and see a common bond between the two faiths. Your fight is with secularism as is ours. At least afford us the respect of not collapsinf under the weight of criticism much like christianity has. Thankyou.


    • mateenelass says:

      Shaquille, I knew I would not be able to respond here as your comment deserves, so I posted a new blog with your comment in full (broken into three segments) and my responses. I hope you will read it and continue the dialogue.


    • Anthony says:



    • John Nelson says:

      “they don’t have the biases and prejudices that most people hold” you can write this yet we have two Muslims in U.S congress who hate Jews spew venom about them just about every day! I don’t buy you attempted sell of Islam.
      Why do the people of Islam believe theirs is the only religion when Christianity was around Centuries before ISLAM was created by Mohammed? Why do Muslims believe the world must follow Sharia Law? Why do Muslims believe the U.S constitution is a document of Mis-INformation and must submit to Sharia Law?
      Why do you think Sharia is the only law, it was created by a human, Mohammed, just like the Constitution, and particularly by a human who was far from perfect, was illiterate and we are suppose to believe he remembers everything Gabriel recited to to him?
      Why can;t Muslims assimilate in to other societies instead of trying to take them over, all other religions do a great job of Assimilating.

      Liked by 2 people

      • charles esfeld says:

        It is what they have been taught since infancy. You are no longer pissing in your pants because you were taught since infancy to not do “that”. THAT IS INGRAINED AS STRONGLY INTO YOUR PSYCHIE as the muslim theory is ingrained into the believers of Allah. Try to come up with something stronger than the teachings of Muhhamud and get the western world to accept it or the western world will become Islamic.


    • Jiminy Qrikert says:

      ‘..when muslims actually speak well of christians and see a common bond between the two faiths.’ Shaqille, which planet are you from? What a load of rubbish…muslims speak well of christians? Goodness, where I come from, all non-Muslims are treated as second class citizens, And all other faiths are treated as inferior. And there is NO common bond between Islam and Christianity. Muslims attack Christians at the slightest opportunity, Muslim mobs gather ever so often to threaten the non-Muslims, Christians especially, at the slightest reason. Churches are attacked. Hindu and Taoist temples are invaded at their whims and fancy. Body-snatching at funerals for burial as a Muslim is not uncommon. Crosses are vandalised. Christian pastors disappear never to be seen again. It has not yet gotten to the state of many of the failed Muslim states like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia where Muslim murder Christians at will and mobs terrorise anyone who dares challenge the position of Islam.But Malaysia is fast getting there. Once the Islamists rule, it will collapse like so many Muslim majority countries where theocracy has ascended above the rubble of a broken previously secular state. Shaqille, what the heck you been smoking?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Courtney Scharfe says:

      Islam. You worship a moon god. You have not met the Christian God. When you do you will be ashamed of the centuries of murder and slavery you have inflicted on the world.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sharon says:

      Sex, sex, sex. Is that your reward from your cult god! Hilarious and SAD at the same time. Sad because you pedophiles use female children, babies for your sexual pleasure. Stay with goats, there’s no spirit there to torture and abuse. Your religion is a cult of evil, even from the time of Abraham when he kicked out Sarah’s bond servant and her don, Abraham’s son, PART JEWISH none the less. As a woman if the USA I reject your cult, your si called bible/Quran, and your pedophile, monstrous Mohammed. You people are so sad and such losers.


    • Sharon says:

      RUBBISH, your people constantly bash Christians, you call us infidels, you rape our women, throw acid in their faces, rape our children. Michigan has become nothing but a sewer because of you Muslims. Your people killed thousands of people in 9/11. You want us to forget, not in this lifetime, I personally will NEVER forgot the atrocities you did on that day. And to beat all, your people were celebrating the attack and all the death. I can still hear it in my head.
      You and your kind do not belong here in America, we the AMERICAN PEOPLE will not ever convert to a sadistic, evil cult like yours.
      The God, Jehovah, will ultimately defeat you and your cult and when you die and stand before GOD, HE will judge you accordingly. And based on your teachings of the Quran and Sharia Law, I expect hell would be a great place for you and your kind.
      But salvation awaits you, all you have to do is ask my lord, Jesus Christ, to come into your heart and accept salvation. We are sinners, but, in Jesus Christ your sins are forgiven. As long as you have Jesus in your heart and follow HIS laws your soul will enter the gates of heaven with open arms and love so amazing!
      I will never forget what happened that day 9n 9/11 and the feelings that have come with it since that day, and I know hating Muslims, even in Christianity, is not the right thing to do, but as I am only human, I struggle with it constantly, but my Lord Jesus Christ is working in me to try to forgive, which is hard. Jesus Christ loves you, all your people, how he can is beyond my reasoning, but he does. And he’s waiting for you and your people to come to him and accept salvation.
      I am a Christian, and I struggle to find understanding as to why you and your people can’t just leave us alone here in America and go back to YOUR land and practice your cult if you must.
      But as it stands, AMERICA will never bow down to an evil, sadistic cult like yours.
      Oh, and sex 8n the afterlife, what a JOKE, a dream created by MAN not by God.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Az gal says:

      Another Muslum liar.


  5. Pingback: Another Load of Rubbish — from “one who seriously lacks an understanding of Islam” | the personal blog of Mateen Elass

  6. Kasia says:

    GREAT ARTICLE!!! Thank you!


  7. K says:

    I just came across this after looking up the word ‘houris’ (read in history book).
    I don’t think Islam is fundamentally bad like you make it sound. Especially with fasting, etc., it has a dedication to the poor (showing, not just telling) that I don’t think your religion has. I’m not saying any religion is better; it’s just something nice that I like about Islam. I don’t know any Muslims that have a “kill and be killed” attitude, either. Also, your paragraph four seems like a good modification upon Christianity (aside from “slaves to Allah”, which is not true)–do you mean that it’s bad that Allah tells Muslims to act naturally, with restraint, and good that God tells Christians that they have inherent defects?


    • mateenelass says:

      K, in all honesty, it doesn’t seem to me that you read this article with an open mind, but rather with an intent to find fault with its message, and as such you have not really grappled with its arguments. The points I made are all supported by texts from the Qur’an — the inerrant, unchanging revelation of Allah, according to Islam. For example, you mention that you don’t know any Muslims with a “Kill and be killed” attitude. I am happy for you — if you did, they would grant you two options of your choosing: either convert to Islam or fight them until you have been killed. A third option, not available to you since you are not a Jew or Christian (or other recognized monotheist), is that you surrender and become a dhimmi, a third-class member of Islamic society. The “kill and be killed” mantra is not of my own making; it is a quote from the Qur’an — please go and look up chapter 9 (entitled “Repentance”), verse 111. Just because many Muslims ignore this passage does not mean it is not central to Islam; it rather means that they are not very committed Muslims.

      By way of analogy, one of Jesus’ central teachings is that his disciples are to love their neighbors as themselves. You may say that you know many Christians and that none of them has a “love your neighbors as yourself” attitude. Wouldn’t you agree that this says more about the lack of seriousness of the Christians with regard to their obedience than about the teaching of Jesus himself? The religion of Islam requires this “Kill and be killed” attitude in the “timeless revelation” of the Qur’an. We can only be grateful that most Muslims in the West are not serious about their allegiance to the commands of their god.

      The fasting enjoined by the Qur’an is not a bad thing; but it is not a deeply spiritual practice for most Muslims, only the fulfilling of a requirement. Did you know that many Muslims actually gain weight during the month of Ramadan? This is because the fasting period is only 12 hours or less; then it is replaced during the evening hours by feasting, even gorging, on delicacies not available during much of the rest of the year. This patten continues for 30 days.

      In terms of care for the poor, I would encourage you to look at how the poor fare in Muslim-majority countries compared to those of the crumbling post-Christian West. When Christian influence was at its strongest in pre-Enlightenment and early post-Enlightenment Europe and America, the surge in the development of colleges and universities, hospitals, charities (such as the Red Cross) and the like were all the work of churches, denominations, mission agencies and wealthy Christian families. Even the early hospitals and best schools in the Middle East (not to mention other Muslim-majority regions) were the work of Christian mission agencies. There is nothing remotely like this in the history of Islam. It is only since European colonization of parts of the Muslim world (post WWI) that these institutions of caring began to become part of the Muslim world, in imitation of the West.

      It is true that Islam requires of its followers an almsgiving tax, known as zakat (meant to parallel the biblical call for a tithe). This annual donation (2.5% of one’s assets for the year), is distributed by the mosque or state (under Muslim government). Some of this money goes to care of the poor — but only the Muslim poor; non-Muslims are forbidden any help from this resource. Additionally, other monies from this zakat tax go to the support of jihad — armed warfare against the non-Muslim world, creating more havoc and poverty through the initiation of conflagration against the infidels.

      So I reject your assertion that Islam has a particular dedication to the poor that is lacking in Christianity. The facts prove quite the contrary.

      Lastly, you seem completely ignorant of the heart of Islam when you claim that my statement concerning “slaves to Allah” is not true of the religion. “Islam” itself means “submission” and the Qur’an is replete with references to the fact that Allah created humans to be his slaves, and that no human being (even Muhammad or Jesus) is more than a slave by nature. According to Islam our given nature (filled with all the lusts for evil as well as yearning for virtue) is normal, and does not need redemption and transformation. One only has to follow Allah’s commands, which are based on no universal moral creed but rather only on what advances the cause of Islam. By contrast, God in the Bible declares that there is a universal moral Law which all human beings are to follow, but our fallen human nature rebels against (hence the reality of sin). Humans need to be rescued from their sins, but also to be transformed from their sinful natures to a nature of perfect harmony with God’s will. This can only be accomplished by divine intervention, which according to the Bible happened with the atoning death of Christ to erase the punishment of our sins, and with the gift of the Holy Spirit dwelling within the hearts of believers, inaugurated at Pentecost (50 days after the day of Resurrection) and granted to each believer upon their being “born again” to new life in Christ.

      So, yes, I think “it’s bad that Allah tells Muslims to act naturally, with restraint,” because they are still acting from their fallen nature, and their restraints are not primarily due to moral law but rather to the situational calculations of what advances the cause of Islam at any given time — murder, rape, slavery, humiliation, racism, deceit, strife, slander, lies and so on are all justified in Islam if the cause is the enshrinement of Islam over the rest of the world. And, yes, I think “it’s good that God tells Christians that they have inherent defects”, though He declares this not only to Christians, but to all human beings, including yourself (and me), so that we will discover our desperate need for rescue from our condition and will seek His solution to our crisis — which the Bible calls salvation through Christ. I pray He will lead you from your present fascination with the darkness of Islam and turn your attention to the light and life found in His Son, Jesus, who declared with no caveats: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except by me” (John 14:6).

      Liked by 2 people

      • K says:

        Hi Mateen, and thanks for your extended response to my thoughts on your article. I did enjoy reading it and I understand where your main points come from. I agree that I was looking for faults in the article, because I disagree with it, but I’m also looking for points in its favor that could change my mind.

        Most of your arguments that Islam is violent and Christianity is a more peaceful and generally ethical religion are based on the Bible and the Qur’an and point out contrasts between the two. I hope you will keep in mind the conditions under which these two religions were introduced and their books written.

        Christianity was intended to appeal to the destitute, polytheistic population of the Roman empire, and it does a good job, with a kind, forgiving God (unlike the God of the Old Testament) and promises of eternal happiness in Heaven after death. Obviously, the many gods that most Romans were worshiping at the time weren’t offering enough support, so this new Christianity sounded like a pretty good idea to them. There was little to lose. Judaism was the other main alternative that Christianity had to contend with, but it didn’t really stand a chance with its mean God, mandatory circumcision, etc.. Christianity was designed to attract the poor.

        Most of Arabia was relatively affluent in Muhammad’s time, so he didn’t have to alleviate the suffering of millions of people. He lived in a region where tribes, families, and towns were forever fighting each other (unlike the relative stability in southern Europe at the introduction of Christianity) and claims of voluminous bloodshed were thrown around after confrontations, when in reality there may not have been a single fatality (actually killing a man was avoided). Many instances of this exaggeration can be seen in Blunt’s “Bedouin Tribes of the Euphrates” and Palgrave’s “Central and Eastern Arabia”, for example.

        Muhammad especially had in mind the Christians up north, since Islam came on the scene when Christianity was really beginning to penetrate the Arabian peninsula, so Christians probably were indeed the target of much of the violent talk. Muhammad knew he had competition when he sat down to write the Qur’an, and he was proven correct a few hundred years later when the Crusades began. He only advocated for his religion over Christianity in a way that others would sympathize with. A Shammar sheikh could have used the same technique to maintain morale during a drought while preparing to steal camels from the Anazeh. The Shammar don’t want to beat out the Anazeh, with whom they may trade and be friends, but only subsist until better weather. Insincere talk of slaughtering outsiders was normal at the time and place, so Muhammad wrote in a way that was natural to him and those around him.

        Considering this, I think we can safely assume that a lot of the violence in the Qur’an is a reflection of contemporary society and was intended as incentive to spread Islam, and should not be taken literally. Similarly, most Christians don’t believe that there is an actual world of pain and suffering in a cave under the ground, but instead that Hell is a metaphor and warning against behaviors that cause problems in groups of people.

        Concerning “slaves of Allah”, I still don’t think this is a big deal. Muslims listen to Allah, and Christians listen to God. The average Muslim lives in a city, goes to work, and has a family. So does the average Christian. The number of Muslims trying to vanquish others is small, and the number of Christians trying to vanquish outsiders is also small. Both do as they are told.

        As far as the Muslim East benefiting from the Christian West, there is an interesting theory called ‘geographic luck’ that helps to explain this. Europe (which also happened to be the center of the Christian world) is a convenient place with good weather and access many resources. This facilitated Europe’s prosperity during much of history. Arabia, on the other hand, is not so lucky, with most wood concentrated in Oman and little access to metal and useful minerals.

        However, Arabs became pretty successful during the European Dark Ages, even building their own hospitals, universities, etc.. This was when Islam was born. Unfortunately, the populous parts of the peninsula are isolated from the rest of the continent by deserts and mountains, so they didn’t see much benefit from the Renaissance (such as modern medicine, literacy, etc.) until oil attracted white people (Christians) there early in the last century.

        Ramadan this year is currently ending, and I’ve often been taking iftaar with friends. If fasting never exceeded twelve hours, that wouldn’t be bad, but the duration of fasting depends on daylight hours, which may or may not be twelve hours or less; when Ramadan falls during summer, fasting exceeds sixteen hours at even moderate latitudes (I feel bad for any Muslims living near the poles). The food is enjoyable, but nothing extravagant. There is usually milk, bread, and some combination of rice, meat, and vegetables (not to mention dates!). If we go to the mosque, this has been mass-produced, so definitely not high quality. Maybe the delicacies and gorging is a local tradition(?).

        Every time I leave the mosque, I am overwhelmed with invitations to return, and they’re not even trying to convert me, unless they’re very sneaky about it. On the other hand, a gay guy was chased out of my grandparents’ church purely for being “the cross-dresser”.

        Considering all this, please keep in mind that there is a lot of history and culture behind modern religions and behind every person, and that a fair evaluation must be very complex.


      • mateenelass says:

        K, thank you for taking the time to write more. Your take on the origins of Christianity and Islam certainly differ from mine. Christianity was not developed to appeal to the people of the Roman Empire. It stemmed from the appearance of the Jewish man, Jesus, who proved himself to be the Messiah promised to the Jewish people in their Scriptures (what we call the Old Testament). The fact that Jesus claimed to know and be one with the God of the Old Testament, and to proclaim a message of love even for enemies undermines your claim that Judaism failed because, in part, it worshiped a “mean god.”

        If “most of Arabia was affluent in Muhammad’s time,” why did Muhammad resort to raiding caravans in order to enable his fledgling ummah in Medina survive? Why not just put them to work in the affluent community where jobs were just waiting to be filled and good wages paid? The answer is — the Arabian peninsula was not swimming in affluence. The native community of Medina could not support the influx of Muslims leaving Mecca to join Muhammad in his new digs.

        One doesn’t have to posit a violent environment in Arabia to explain the Qur’an’s commands for violence. They are traceable directly to Muhammad — in his 10 years in Medina before dying by poison, he ordered some 78 attacks on non-Muslim traders or communities, and personally led 27 of these attacks. That averages to one authorized attack every 7-8 weeks. This does not include, of course, Muhammad’s orders concerning assassination of mockers and rivals, nor orders for execution of those taken prisoner in raids/battles, unless they were ransomed so that he could amass greater resources to buy more weapons to increase the potency of his army for future conquests.

        When Muhammad started his work in Mecca, he had very little knowledge of Christianity or interaction with Christians, as Mecca, a pagan center, held very few Christians. It is clear from the Qur’an that Muhammad understood little of basic Christian doctrine. His main interest in Jews and Christians early on was due to the fact he knew they were monotheists, and he was hoping they would prove allies bolstering his claim to be the Arab prophet of the One God. When they listened to his claims and teachings, they concluded his words were not in line with the revelation of the God of the Bible, and so they demurred from any allegiance. When this happened, Muhammad’s positive or neutral comments about Jews and Christians turned negative, particularly toward the Jews, with whom he had constant interaction in Medina until he had converted, killed or driven out the three major Arab Jewish tribes that predated him in Medina, all within less than 6 years.

        Muslims can be wonderful people, and I am glad you are finding them so hospitable! I know this personally as well, having been raised in the Middle East and coming from a large Muslim family. But please — do not confuse friendly people with the truth claims of the religion to which they are attached (in greater or lesser degree). Look at the actual teachings of that faith, and at the lifestyle and behaviors of its founder. I would especially encourage you to compare and contrast the life of Muhammad with that of Jesus. Read the Qur’an for yourself, and the Sira (biography) of Ibn Ishaq — the earliest on the life of Muhammad, written by a Muslim about 200 years after his death. It’s an eye-opener, even in spite of having been “cleaned up” by Ibn Ishaq’s disciple Ibn Hisham, who said some of the accounts of Muhammad were too unseemly to record for posterity.

        Lastly, it’s always dangerous to compare groups based on anecdotal stories. I’m sorry to hear of the lack of welcome experienced by the gay cross-dresser who visited your grandparents’ church. However, if he had visited a mosque in a Muslim land, he would have been lucky only to have been driven out. More likely, he would have been beaten, taken up the minaret and thrown off, only to have been stoned afterward on the street to make sure no life was left in his body. This was the typical punishment of the Islamic State, which devoutly kept Shari’a law based on Muhammad’s Hadith pronouncements.


  8. Bob Smith says:

    American RICO statutes (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) were intended to go after the mafia. The acts of Islamic mullahs and jihadis clearly falls into the same pattern as the mafia. The only difference being, Islam’s claim of an oddball form of “religious legitimacy”.

    The US should use the RICO statutes to, declare Islam, a criminal enterprise. Then close Islam down as it presently exists in the US.

    RICO allows the government to follow crime and money. Then, arrest all, and confiscate anything in its path.

    You can be sure the movement of money for jihad is widespread. You can be sure the incitement and communication between mullahs and mosques is widespread. You can also be sure there is foreign involvement. The RICO statutes were made just for this type of activity.

    Use a small army of CPAs and attorneys to investigate every jihad attack. Follow 100% of the money back to its source. Track anyone involved, in any way. Then use the RICO statutes to jail, confiscated, and shut down all involved. That includes:

    M1 – Shutting down mosques involved in any jihad attack.
    M2 – Arrest mullahs involved.
    M3 – Follow, and confiscate, all jihad money back to its source.

    Read it all at:

    Liked by 1 person

  9. michaelforkingdavid says:

    I don’t agree that Islam will disappear into oblivion. When it captures Europe it will acquire a new lease on life, with the use of the resources and infrastructure of modern industry. It could easily last for another thousand years.


  10. Keys says:

    K –
    You say that Mohammad was proven correct about the Crusades. No doubt you are aware of the so-called Meccan verses and Medinan verses in the Koran, and that Mohammad said in one of the Hadiths that he had been made victorious through terror.

    Please view a dynamic visual of the Muslim expansion in to the Middle East, the Mediterranean, and Europe (not including the expansion in to India and other areas), and compare that with a dynamic visual of the Crusades as shown in this link.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. eduardo odraude says:

    For someone raised in Saudi Arabia, Mateen writes extremely well in English.

    Great article.

    One caveat: There are two kinds of secularism, and it is important to distinguish them. One of them is good, the other is questionable, depending on one’s worldview.

    The first kind of secularism means only that the government does not favor any worldview or religion. The First Amendment of the US Constitution enshrines this kind of secularism. It is the opposite of theocracy or any other kind of totalitarianism. This kind of secularism is wholly good, in my view.

    The second kind of secularism refers to a culture in which people no longer believe in any kind of religion or transcendent reality. Personally, I think this kind of secularism is, on the whole, an error and an impoverishment of human experience,

    So whenever one is criticizing secularism, it is good to make clear that one is not against the First Amendment and similar laws. One may be critical of secularism as an anti- or non-religious worldview, and yet be willing to die to defend a law like the First Amendment.


  12. bvberry says:

    I am an atheist and have been for many years. While I understand what you saying I just cannot believe. If there is no hope without belief in God then we are doomed as many people are leaving the church looking for something else. Sorry.


    • mateenelass says:

      bvberry, you are correct that many people are leaving the church, but that reality is true mainly in Europe and North America. In the rest of the world, the church is growing and in many places growing rapidly. Additionally, you presume it is the case that because many people are leaving the church they no longer are searching for God. I think this is a faulty premise. The hunger for God remains — they just haven’t found a connection with Him in the modern/post-modern Western churches, many of which have abandoned the heart of the gospel message.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Annie says:

      Hi BvBerry,

      I’m a former Militant Atheist, Now Agnostic who is seriously considering Christianity.

      It is a very very bizarre experience to start considering Christianity to be the truth, after so many years of vehemently rejecting it and believing that in no way shape or form, could I as an atheist, every go back to believing in such nonsense.

      I’m now starting to go back to church.

      People are leaving the church but I think they will return. I just hope to god, that Christian churches stop being so in the world, trying to modernize, and start speaking the Biblical truths with Authority.

      I really understand that line in Amazing Grace “I was blind, but now I see”. It is an extraordinary journey to say the least, and if you are searching at all(which is probably why you are here), keep doing that. I could even give you a few pointers, although I am still learning and researching, so that may not be worth all that much.


      Liked by 1 person

    • Annie says:

      Moderator, can you please edit my last post? I said I am “Now” going to church. Argh, I should have read that properly. 2nd Paragraph was poorly written also. Sorry!


  13. eduardo odraude says:

    K, you say you don’t think Islam is fundamentally bad and that you are not saying any religion is better than the others.

    Sorry, but the evidence is almost entirely against you. Several aspects all dovetail to point in one direction.

    1. The state of human rights in the Muslim-majority world, especially its core Middle East/North africa, is worse than in any other region of the world.

    2. Pew global polls of Muslims show that large percentages support totalitarian aspects of Islamic law;

    3. The core texts of Islam, Qur’an, Hadith, Sira, show Muhammad leading and urging a totalitarian expansionist theocratic movement that does not include freedom of religion or freedom of speech.

    4. When someone criticizes Islam publicly, that person receives numerous death threats. If Muslims are a substantial minority in a population, criticizing Islam is physically risky.

    5. Christianity leads over time to the separation of religion and state, because Christians believe that Christ said to “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, to God the things that are God’s” and “My kingdom is not of this world.” Because of those and other words, Christians from the very beginning believed society was to have two distinct realms, though there was much confusion about where the boundary should lie, and so sometimes popes dominated kings, or kings dominated popes, but there was always at least a latent awareness that there were to be two distinct realms. This division of powers left enough space in European societies to permit them to evolve, and eventually the European Enlightement resulted and the First Amendment of the US Constitution formalized the two realms. By contrast, Muhammad became Caesar, or at any rate the ruler of an expansionist theocratic state. Thus Islam’s prime exemplar represents theocracy and the absence of free speech and freedom of religion. Muhammad, in a canonical hadith, said “If someone changes his Islamic religion, then kill him.”

    6. The Qur’an denies that human beings are made in the image of God. As I recall, Surah 42:11 tells us that nothing is like Allah. One translation even says, “Naught is as his likeness.” No, Muslims are not images of Allah, they are nothing more than his servants or slaves. The Qur’an repeatedly says this in other ways, too. Allah is not a father, and we are not his children. Christianity obviously conceives God as father and humans as God’s children. In another place, the Qur’an attacks the Bible where the Bible says God worked 6 days and rested on the 7th. You see, according to the Qur’an, Allah does not need to work or actively create. Allah just COMMANDS something to be, and it is. So right at the core, Allah is a dictator, a God of fiat. The biblical God also gives commands, but there is a huge difference in emphasis, where the biblical God is a God of creative activity, and human beings are told in the Bible to imitate God’s creative act, for example to be “fruitful and multiply.” Whereas for a devout Muslim, not the image of Allah, nor Allah’s child, but only his servant or slave, to create is a rash and dangerous act.

    One could go on and on about the totalitarian characteristics of Islamic doctrine, vs the way in which Christianity, over time, leads to free and open societies. Even if Islam and Christianity are tissues of pure fantasy, it is clear that they have and will have very different social outcomes.

    And “moderates” like you, K (if you really are a moderate), are providing cover for the core of the movement, the self-censorship it forces on anyone in the West who does not want to be killed by some jihadist. Even with just a minority of Muslims, the FBI told Molly Norris in the US that they could not protect her from all the death threats she was getting, and urged her to change her name and disappear. Is Islam evil? Oh yes. And you moderates, the longer you keep your head in the sand about what you are providing cover for, the more responsible you are for the loss of basic freedoms your movement is bringing, currently in Europe, perhaps soon in the US. The genuine moderates are not guilty of jihad terror, but are negligent in not paying sufficient, honest, unbiased attention to the core texts of Islam. Your negligence grows by the day, as something like a Muslim genocide against Christians and other non-Muslims becomes more evident. But go ahead, stick your head in the sand, delude yourself, delude others. Good luck with that.


  14. Pingback: Can Islam Be Defeated? | US News Today

  15. Tht says:

    I believe there are two elementary forces driving Islam:
    First is the fear of Allah means punishment for disobedience and second is the temptations means rewards for obedience.
    These two that is fear and temptations are inherent weaknesses of human mind and when these dominate the mind, a person’s intellect and reasoning vanishes temporarily.


  16. For a more detailed discussion of this very topic, have a look at “Ministering to Muslims” by Abel & Solomon. This includes very some very specific details on how to prove to Muslims that the Koran is not the true Word of God but is, in fact, a covenant with demons. Once Muslims start to realise that their religion is not the definitive last word of God but is based on a book which is scientifically, historically and philosophically incorrect, then they will be open to change…


  17. Alan Hamilton says:

    I was very taken by your article today. The most pertinent point being “Islam is such a powerful movement because it is the perfect religion to appeal to the flesh.” In doing so Islam eviscerates the central tenets of the Christian faith by denying Allah has a son as it is not befitting to his majesty, denying that Jesus died on the cross and denying the Trinity all with insults, curses and calls of blasphemy. (Quran 9:30, 4:157, 4:171, 5:17, 5:72-73, 19:35 ) Of course the game in so called interfaith is that Jesus is in the Quran. This was recently quoted confidently by my local CoE vicar as it that settles something. However reading the Quran reveals that the Quran’s Jesus is not the Jesus of the bible but a miraculous fatherless created being for no apparent reason but to endorse the message in the Quran and deny explicitly Christianity, all with the usual threats and insults 9:29-30 , 8:55 and 98:6. The Quran also explicitly states for Muslims to pretty well not to have any dealings with Jews or Christians 3:28, 5:51.

    So why does the Quran go out of the way to deny Jesus the Son of God, to deny the cross, to deny the Trinity? To have an illegitimate Jesus without a father. That reveals a relationship with creation problem. The god of the Quran has no real relationship with the creation unlike the God of the Bible.

    Your article goes beyond Islam but deals with the ills of Western society. The article also goes into what is different about the God of the Bible and His relationship with it in ‘Life in the Spirit’ using the teaching of Paul. We can get lost here in theological teaching and terms which abstract the reality. We use explanations by Paul and in the epistles which while not wrong sometimes miss the basics such as: You must be Born Again in the Spirit John 3:5-15 ( by the way that passage also explains the reason for the bronze serpent in Numbers 21:9 that prefigured Jesus on the Cross. He became sin for us and nailed it on a cross, that Jesus died for our sins is also something explicitly denied in the Quran 4:157)

    Also in the article is an indication of falling away from the faith and the weakness of Christianity in the West. The church converted to an arts centre as a metaphor. Where is the salt today may you ask? Mt 5:13-14.

    This is important as this explains why the Quran is so ambivalent to Jesus as the Son of God and His death on a cross.

    John 14 v 16 “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.

    Yes the Holy Spirit is sent as a personal Helper to a believer to be with them forever and will abide with you and be in you. Who is the Holy Spirit, the Helper? He is the Spirit of Truth! Can you see why Jesus death is denied, the Spirit your Helper who will be in you denied? Can you see why Christianity is such a problem to Secular Humanism, Islam, and enemies of God? The Spirit of Truth, the Helper will teach you all things Jn 14:26, will guide you into all Truth Jn16:13. What is so lacking today: Truth! It is being suppressed/perverted at every turn. You will be in more trouble today stating plan facts and the truth than ever before.

    Denying the Trinity is to deny God. Why? John 14 23 Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.

    Yes the God of the Bible desires relationship with His creation as we are made in His image. God uses the term Father to illustrate that relationship. The god of the Quran would never do such a thing, can never be addressed as Father and explicitly denies anything that would lead to such a thing. Even the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem has inscribed round it: Allah has no son.

    Why is that relationship so precious and why is life so precious. Why ultimately is it wrong to kill for your faith? Because all men (note woman has man with a ‘wo’ in front so it is inclusive it you look ) are made in the image of God: Gen 1:26. As a born again believer you are ‘a Temple of the Holy Spirit’ 1 Cor 6:19.

    Why then is the West in such decline with such an inheritance? It is all a relationship issue. People no longer know who God is and elements in society have done their best to erase God from society’s consciousness. The church has lost sight of the relationship with God and life in the Spirit. Even the charismatic churches in their pursuit of spiritual power over relationship. You can sum up the problem: The church charismatic movement has largely concentrated on the power of the Holy Spirit and not of the Person of the Holy Spirit as the Helper sent by Jesus (Jn 14:16-17). The salt is in the relationship, the power is in the relationship. That has been neglected. The Bible is full of what happens when people stop listening to God. God stops listening and He gives them over ( Rom 1 24,26,28), makes people blind and deaf Isa 6 v9-10 (quoted 6 times in the New Testament) sends a powerful delusion even: 2 Thess 2 v11.

    The solution repent and turn to the throne seek Jesus John 14 6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

    That is why Jesus sent the Helper, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth:

    John 15 26“When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me

    The Holy Spirit will testify about Jesus! No wonder the Quran denies the Trinity. The Quran does not want you to know the God of the Bible the Father who sent His Son Jesus. Man cannot prevent the Holy Spirit acting on your heart but can discourage you from even trying.


    • mateenelass says:

      Thank you for your cogent, biblical thoughts. Muhammad, sadly, had no clue about the personal, Trinitarian God revealed in and through the Bible, and merely used the historical personages of the Scriptures to advance his own plans, much the way a parasite uses its host to strengthen itself in the process.


      • Alan says:

        Quite who would you believe? A God who sends His Son John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

        Or someone on and from Earth who disagrees with that message? Plus the fact as a Christian you are not encouraged to fight or kill for the message above. The worst Jesus told his disciples to do if people did not receive them or the message was to brush the dust of that village off their feet and move on. Mat 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5 even Luke 9:54-56. Contrast that with the teachings in the Quran. Unfortunately we will then be told all about the Crusades of course omitting the Islamic worldwide conquests of the previous 3 centuries.


  18. cicorp says:

    Islam seems like a great deal for many men: multiple young wives who don’t talk back or flirt with other guys, cook, and make a lot of children.
    Surprisingly it is mostly women who want to import them from the 3rd world


  19. Sue E Krippner says:

    I have been reading substantial amounts of information about this horrible religion and in most of what I have read very little is covered in respect to women.

    My question/comment is this: Why would any woman want to participate in the lust filled, violent, misogynistic religion? From FGM, the prohibitive dress required by adolescent men, sex slavery…I’m having a difficult time understanding why a woman would tolerate such treatment in this 21st century?
    Also, the appalling “rewards in heaven” continues its disgusting abuse/use of woman as a part of eternal orgy- what heavenly reward is offered to the “obedient” women of the male gratifying muslim demands?


    • mateenelass says:

      Most Muslim women are born into the religion and don’t believe they have any choice in the matter — these are Allah’s decrees. Those who join Islam willingly usually believe a sanitized Westernized version of Islam that hides the truth from them until after they have converted. If they remain in the West, they are very often protected from the worst degradations that most non-Western Muslim women endure as a matter of course.


  20. Ishmael Warner says:

    Nor is Islam “one of the three great Abrahamic religions” as falsely claimed by Islamic deceivers and their dhimmi socialist Christian apologists.

    When Muhammad first started preaching, he was trying to persuade the Jews and Christians of the truth [sic] of his claim to being the final prophet in the line of Jewish prophets.

    Muhammad plagiarised his scriptures from the Jewish Torah and Christian New Testament, wrote himself into a central role, then asserted that the Jews and Christians had corrupted their scriptures, and he was ‘bringing them back.’

    This is why the Meccans referred to Muhammad derisively as “this forger.” They were well-aware he’d made it all up.

    The only truth in Muhammad’s claims was that he — along with all other Arabs — was descended from Abraham via Ishmael, Abraham’s illegitimate son with the slave girl Hagar.

    Those who compare the Koran to the Bible are probably not well-acquainted with either text.

    A comparison between the life of Jesus as set out in the New Testament and the life of Muhammad as set out in the Koran and Sunna shows that they are total opposites.

    Jesus taught love and forgiveness for all mankind.

    Muhammad taught hatred and death for anyone who was not a Muslim.

    Jesus showed that racism had no place in His Kingdom.

    Muhammad taught that black people were ‘raisins’ and good only to be slaves.

    Jesus taught that women were equal to men.

    Muhammad taught that the value of a Muslim woman was half that of a man; and that non-Muslim women were good for nothing but to be sex slaves.

    Jesus taught that murder was sin.

    Muhammad taught that murder was the way of Islam for anyone who would not convert, abandoned their Islamic religion, was unlucky enough to be raped without male witnesses to prove it, or preferred the back bum to the front bum.

    Jesus taught that lying was always a sin.

    Muhammad taught that lying was the art of war and part of jihad.

    Jesus taught freedom of choice and wanted people to come to Him because they loved Him.

    Muhammad taught that everyone must become a Muslim whether they liked it or not; and if they turned their backs on Islam, they had to die.

    Jesus taught that in His Father’s House there were many mansions, and that His followers would spend eternity communing with and praising God.

    Muhammad taught that Allah’s paradise was a tavern and a brothel, in which his followers would spend eternity fornicating and carousing.

    Jesus gave His Life for ALL MANKIND, was crucified and went down into Hell for three days to pay the penalty for our sins, rose again to be seen alive in the flesh by His disciples, then ascended to be reunited with His Father in Heaven.

    Muhammad vowed to take the lives of all Mankind if they did not follow him, died from poison in his food because Allah declined to warn him, then want down into Hell to pay the penalty for his own sins, and was never seen again.

    To suggest that Jesus and Muhammad represent the same God flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

    As the New Testament at Matthew 7:15-20 reminds us:
    “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

    “Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

    “Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

    “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

    “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

    “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”

    Western Nations are so much more civilised than Middle Eastern nations because their laws are founded on Christian principles, not on the dictates of a self-absorbed psychopath whose vanity and lust for worldly power has led to the deaths of an estimated 270 million people — and counting — with at least as many more enslaved.

    By their fruits shall ye know them, indeed.


  21. Ishmael Warner says:

    Before he became a prophet [sic], Muhammad used to take himself off to meditate in a cave. Then the ‘Angel Gabriel’ began appearing to Muhammad, telling him repeatedly that he’d been chosen to be Allah’s final messenger to humankind.

    At first, Muhammad didn’t believe this. He thought he was going crazy and wanted to commit suicide. His first wife, Khadijah, talked him out of it. She convinced him that he was indeed a prophet, and should embrace his mission rather than running from it.

    If Muhammad was God’s final messenger, why would God first send Jesus with “do unto others as ye would be done by and love thy neighbour as thyself” then send Muhammad immediately afterwards with “hate and kill anyone who is not a Muslim”?

    A clue.

    Stick with the theology a moment.

    Then ask yourself whether the god of the Koran is indeed the God of the Bible, as Muhammad wants us to believe.

    The Bible refers to Satan as “the lord of this world” because when Lucifer was expelled from Heaven and became Satan, he was given the World to be his province.

    The Gospels record that Jesus went out into the wilderness to meditate for 40 days and 40 nights. Then, Satan came to Jesus. He took Jesus up onto a mountaintop and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in an instant.

    Satan told Jesus he would give Him “all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them,” if He would fall down and worship him. Clearly, Satan could not offer what was not his to bestow. Satan, in other words, was inviting Jesus to join forces with him. He offered Him authority over the world, as his subordinate, of course.

    Satan was tempting Jesus with the opportunity to accomplish His mission through political power. Jesus successfully resisted the temptation by rejecting the offer. He would not attempt to avoid the way of suffering for selfish and ambitious reasons — love of power and a desire to rule politically over others.

    Satan was attempting to turn Jesus away from His true mission through worldly ambition. Jesus could not have saved the souls of men by establishing a worldly kingdom.

    At Matthew 6:19-21 Jesus said: “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal. But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

    Contrast this with Bukhari 4.52.220: “Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.’”

    Sounds like Muhammad got the same offer Jesus did, and accepted it!

    At Revelations 12:7, John refers to Satan as “The Deceiver of the Whole World.”

    According to the Koran, Allah is the “best of deceivers” (3:54; 8:30), so it seems we might just be talking about the same spiritual entity.

    Jesus, on the other hand, said at John 14:6: “I am the Way, the TRUTH [emphasis added], and the Life, and no man cometh to the Father but by Me.”

    Say WHAT?

    Just whom do you think Muhammad actually communed with in that cave?

    I say “Iblis!”


  22. Ishmael Warner says:

    Comparing Islam to Christianity is called a moral equivalence argument. It fails.

    A moral equivalence argument holds that two unrelated wrongs make a right (or at least cancel one another out).

    Muslims practising taqiyya (religiously sanctioned lying misrepresenting Islam as “peaceful”) and West-hating Socialist traitors running interference for Islam often deploy moral equivalence arguments, which attempt to conflate the historic acts of Christians or one-off acts of terrorism perpetrated by attention-seeking narcissists with the way Muslims have behaved (and continue to behave) for the last 1400 years since the time of Muhammad. The implication is that since Christians are just as bad as Muslims, we have no business pointing the finger at Muslims.

    Moral equivalence arguments invariably arise when the point is made that Islam is not a “Religion of Peace” at all, but a “Religion of Violence.” These arguments are misleading or irrelevant and do not contest the actual evidence that violence is inherent in Islam. Nonetheless, they have proven rhetorically effective in shielding Islam from serious scrutiny.

    Their point is to suggest that the world is made up of two “morally equivalent” religions and their resulting cultures. Both do nasty things (though somehow Islamic actions are always more “defensible”) in a struggle for world domination meaning Westerners have no moral standing to object to the actions of Islamic Jihadists.

    Moral equivalence arguments conflating Islam and Christianity are unsustainable. Christianity condemns violence while Islam promotes it. The simple fact is that Jesus was a man of peace, taught His disciples to be non-violent, and the New Testament does not have a single verse instructing violence in it.

    Muslims and their apologists claim this is not the case. They cite Matthew 10:34 in support of this contention: “Do not suppose that I come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”

    In Islam, the Koran is held to be the absolute, literal, revealed words of Allah. The mistake Muslims make here is in assuming that the Bible is be interpreted in a similarly literal manner. A deliberate attempt to take Matthew 10:34 out of context is also evident.

    Jesus did not contradict Himself. When we look at His words in context, we can see what He was saying and that there is no contradiction at all. A sword is a weapon that divides and severs. But the sword to which Jesus refers was never a literal one, and is not a weapon of war. Jesus is speaking about the divisions that will occur, even among family members, over their belief or lack of belief in Him.

    As the entire passage, Matthew 10:34-36 makes clear: “Do not suppose that I came to bring peace to the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.”

    To be hated by family members may be part of the cost of discipleship, for love of family should not be greater than love for the Lord. In following Jesus, a true disciple must be willing to face not only family hatred, but even death, like a criminal carrying his cross to his own execution.

    The Bible records Jesus as acting violently just once. Against property, not persons, when He overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple because they’d turned the House of God into a den of thieves. Jesus instructed His disciples to “turn the other cheek” to their enemies. When Peter cut off the ear of a man in the party sent to arrest Him, Jesus healed the man and restored his severed ear. The Disciples were told: “Those who live by the sword die by the sword.”

    To be a Christian, one must strive to emulate Jesus and follow New Testament instruction. The fact that many who profess to be Christians do not follow the example of Jesus or adhere to biblical instruction does not make Christianity culpable. Christian hypocrites are not unknown.

    Contrast this with Islam. At Koran 40: 35, we learn that kafirs (non-Muslims) are “despised by Allah.” The Koran explicitly commands Muslims to be violent to kafirs, to Muslims who are insufficiently pious according to Islamic law (hypocrites), and to those who abandon their Islamic religion (apostates).

    Muslims are told at Koran 33: 21 that a Muslim who loves Allah and wishes to enter paradise must strive to emulate Muhammad: “Assuredly you have in the Messenger of Allah [Muhammad] an excellent example to follow for whoever looks forward to Allah and the Last Day, and remembers and mentions Allah much.

    And what is this example?

    According to Islamic sources accepted by all Muslims, Muhammad was a man of violence. A robber, rapist, pirate, murderer, and pedophile who in the last nine years of his life mounted an unprovoked jihadist attack on his neighbours on average every six weeks, and aged 53 married a six year old Aisha, consummating the marriage when he was 56 and she nine years old.

    The Sira (Muhammad’s biography by Ibn Ishaq) and the various Ahadith collections (the authenticated sayings and actions of Muhammad) demonstrate that he taught his followers to be violent, to assassinate his critics, to bear false witness, and to enter into treaties one has no intention of keeping if these actions advance Islam. Kafirs who refuse to accept Islam can be lied to, deceived, robbed, raped, murdered, their children sold as slaves, and their womenfolk handed out to Muslims as sex slaves.

    So violent Muslims are acting entirely in accordance with both the commandments of Allah and the example and instructions of Muhammad; while violent Christians are acting completely contrary to the teachings and example of Jesus. It should be noted at this point that the Christian doctrine of “just war” was developed in response to centuries of unprovoked jihadist aggression by Muslims against Christendom.

    You cannot blame Christianity for violence when it teaches peace. Islam, on the other hand, can most certainly be blamed for violence because it teaches violence.

    Simple as that.

    When the topic of discussion is Islam, all the leftard shills running interference for it start pointing the finger at other religions, especially Christianity. Funny that.

    When we’re talking about the Catholic Church and paedophile priests you don’t see leftards jumping in with “And what about those Muslims?” even if Islamic scripture endorses greybearded old men taking child brides as young as nine years old.

    No, they stick to the topic.

    Unlike any discussion about Islam that is relentlessly converted into a comparison with Christianity. And always becomes a hate on Christianity.

    Leftard “atheists” are actively and implacably anti-Christian (“Religion is the Opiate of the Masses”), but always stand up for Islam as “the enemy of my enemy.” A genuine atheist wouldn’t give a monkey’s crutch-piece whether someone had any religion or no religion, since they don’t believe in it anyway.

    Funny how leftard atheists constantly go on the defensive for Islam.
    Curious behaviour.


  23. Ishmael Warner says:

    What I wrote in New Zealand on the day of the Christchurch mosque shootings.

    Christchurch was a statistical anomaly. An aberration. An outlier.

    Sri Lanka was back to business as usual for Islam.

    Nobody wishes to condone evil.

    Evil is evil no matter who perpetrated it, which is why decent people reflexively rally behind those who have been victimised.

    How are New Zealanders reacting towards the Christchurch mosque shootings?

    With a mass outpouring of sympathy towards the victims and their families, and unreserved condemnation of the shooter.

    How did Muslims all over the world – many welcomed into the West with open arms – react to 9/11 and other jihadist outrages?

    Overwhelmingly, they celebrated.

    Since I’m not a leftist, I believe in personal responsibility. Groups linked by a common characteristic are not collectively responsible for the actions of every other member of their notional collective.

    Individuals are entirely responsible for their own actions.

    Just as all white males cannot be blackened for the wrongful actions of one white male, all Muslims cannot be smeared for the wrongful actions of fellow-Muslims.

    But we should not lose sight of the fact that there are two kinds of Muslims:

    – “Cultural” Muslims, who are born into Islam, cherry-pick the nice parts, and don’t act out on the nasty parts. They are practising what we might call “passive Islam” and are not at war with non-Muslims.

    – “Religious” Muslims, who believe they have a theological obligation to make Islam supreme over all other religious and political systems. They are practising what we might call “active Islam” and are most certainly at war with us.

    For convenience, let’s call the second group, “Islamists.”

    The West’s problem is that a “cultural” Muslim can decide at any time to self-activate as an Islamist. This means every Muslim is just one imam and a desire for a closer religious commitment away from becoming a jihadist.

    Let’s hear from arrested Australian Islamist, Ibrahim Abbas:

    “I began to re-evaluate my belief in Allah and I began to believe in Allah again, and then thereafter I became religious and started to seek knowledge, familiarise myself with the faith. I listened to scholars that would talk about the life of the Prophet. I’d read books, attend lectures, go to the mosque, have discussions with people about the Islamic religion… I believed it was obligatory upon me to eventually commit an act of terror.”

    My reading of Islamic scripture suggests the Islamists are theologically correct. They certainly believe that they are.

    There are nice Muslims, but there’s no such thing as a “nice” Islam. Anything in Islam about religious tolerance towards non-Muslims comes from early in Muhammad’s prophethood [sic] when he was still trying to win converts by dawa (“outreach”).

    Once he had thousands of armed men riding behind him, Muhammad changed Islam to reflect his new-found power. His followers were now called upon to fight aggressive jihad and spread Islam by armed force.

    Since Islam holds that the Koran is the absolute, revealed word of Allah, everything in it is “true.” Contradictions between early, peaceful suras (verses) and later suras telling Muslims to fight non-Muslims for religious and political supremacy are resolved in Islamic jurisprudence by making the revelations situational.

    Following the example and instructions of Muhammad, Islamists present as peaceful when their numbers are small, but only because this phase of battlefield preparation is best-accomplished by “making nice.” They operate under a “religion of peace” public relations strategy until powerful enough to flex their muscles and kill.

    Those peddling this line selectively quote Koran 2: 256: “There is no compulsion in religion” and Koran 25: 63: “The worshippers of the All-Merciful [Allah] are those who tread the earth gently and, when the ignorant speak to them, they reply ‘Peace.’”

    These are suras of the early period, when Mohammed was living in Mecca, had a mere handful of followers, and was still trying to win converts by persuasion. His subsequent revelations after the Hijrah (“migration”) to Medina make it clear Islam was only “peaceful” when Muhammad didn’t have the numbers.

    Earlier suras about being nice to non-Muslims are struck out or overwritten by Muhammad’s later revelations. This Muhammad taught at Koran 2: 105: “Whatever verses we [Allah] cancel or cause you to forget, we bring a better or its like.”

    Muslims call this “naskh,” usually translated as “abrogation.”

    Once Muslims are strong and numerous, they have a theological obligation to wage war on non-Muslims, as set out in Koran 47:35: “So do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior; and Allah is with you and will never deprive you of [the reward of] your deeds.”

    Here’s a few of the later revelations:

    Bukhari: V1B2N25: “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 best in goodness?’ He replied, ‘To participate in Jihad, religious fighting in Allah’s Cause.’”

    Koran 8:39: “Fight them [non-Muslims] till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.”

    Koran 9: 5: “Fight and kill the unbelievers wherever ye shall find them.”

    Koran 47.4: “When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads.”

    Koran 4: 95 excuses Muslims whose circumstances (age, gender, infirmity) mean they can’t actively engage in Jihad, though they still have a duty to fund it. Jihadists, however, are accorded the greater status: “Allah has granted a rank higher to those who strive hard, fighting Jihad with their wealth and bodies to those who sit (at home). Unto each has Allah promised good, but He prefers Jihadists who strive hard and fight above those who sit home. He has distinguished his fighters with a huge reward.”

    The more devout, the more passionately committed a Muslim is to Islam, the more he comes into alignment with Islam’s inherent extremism. While we keep telling ourselves what Islam means, Muslims keep showing us what Islam means. Islam is teaching us every day about what it actually is through the behaviour of its most devout followers.

    While Muslims in NZ have suffered a disgusting and deplorable attack in their places of worship, their co-religionists elsewhere in a position to act out on their religion are doing exactly the same thing to non-Muslims, one-thousandfold.

    The Christchurch mosque shootings are of enormous assistance to local Islamists, operating to reduce the mainstream’s sense of threat; allowing Islamists and their dupes to paint Muslims as victims rather than the aggressive challengers the evidence of other jurisdictions confirms they will morph into once strong and numerous enough to act out on their religion.

    Local Muslims are – for now – at the polite end of the Muslim spectrum. But once Islam attains a critical mass, expect a significant number will follow the commandments of their religion to self-segregate and wage aggressive jihad to advance Islam.

    Speaking on the date of the Christchurch mosque shootings, controversial Australian senator, Fraser Anning, reminds us: “While Muslims may have been the victims today, usually they are the perpetrators.”

    With the first Islamist terror attack on NZ soil, we will see the true face of Islam.

    Keep in mind there have been more than 34, 731 Islamist terrorist attacks since 9/11 and counting.

    In the last 30 days, there were 113 Islamic attacks in 21 countries, in which 761 people were killed and 766 injured.



  24. Ishmael Warner says:


    According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Christchurch mosque shooter, Brenton Tarrant spent time in Turkey and Pakistan last year, 2018. He even posted on Facebook that Pakistan was, “an incredible place filled with the most earnest, kindhearted and hospitable people in the world.”

    Why would someone claiming he’s incubated hatred against Islam for two years go to an Islamic country less than six months ago, remain there for some time, and speak so emphatically and positively about its inhabitants?

    Yet scant months later, there he is in two mosques with a gun, apparently hating on Muslims.

    Something doesn’t ring true.

    Muhammad said “War is deceit’ and “Allah is the best of deceivers.”

    Did Brenton Tarrant secretly convert to Islam, then carry out a false flag attack to radicalise moderate Australian and NZ Muslims; foster group cohesion by creating a sense the Islamic community is under threat from outsiders; and deflect criticism of Islam and its agendas by positioning non-Muslims to act reflexively as protectors and enablers?

    If Tarrant was indeed a convert acting as above, he’d have pretty much booked a place in Allah’s paradise. And what’s a bit of collateral damage for the cause, particularly when those who die as martyrs for Allah go straight to heaven?

    When there’s shared tragedy involving mass loss of life, the reactions of those directly affected and left behind run the gamut of human emotion.

    Some are stunned.

    Some are resigned.

    Some are angry, and seek a target to blame or lash out at.

    Some in this category go as far as expressing a desire for revenge.

    Yet everything we have heard from the local Islamic community is peace, love, and reconciliation.

    This suggests a scripted, co-ordinated community response.

    Keep lulling the kuffaar into a false sense of security and banking all that lovely “victim capital” leftists ensure goes to their pet minority groups.

    With the first Islamic jihadist attack, Islam should rightly be in the cross-hairs of criticism, but watch the MSM run around covering for it.

    “Mentally ill”

    “A peaceful religion hijacked by a handful of extremists.”

    “An ISIL hit team our security services should have picked up at the border.”

    Mark my words (though I hope not!)

    Irrespective of what one might think of Islam, nobody in their right mind would approve of or condone the actions of the Christchurch mosque shooter.

    However, his actions and the 50 lives lost need to be put in perspective.

    The Christchurch mosque shootings appal precisely because they stand alone. This is not how we do things in New Zealand, so we have nothing against which to compare them.

    They roll differently in other countries.

    Elsewhere in the world, Muslims have been murdering one another over religious differences, and attacking and killing non-Muslims without ceasing for more than 1400 years since the time of Muhammad.

    Over the last 1400 years, Islam is responsible for an estimated 270 million deaths worldwide, and at least as many people again enslaved. Islamic jihadists invaded and conquered non-Muslim countries, wiping out local religions and cultures, in order to forcibly impose an alien culture that was Arabic and Islamic.

    In Islamic countries — as per the example and instructions of Muhammad — Muslims regarded by hardliners as insufficiently pious (“hypocrites”) and apostates (those deemed to have “abandoned their Islamic religion”) are brutally murdered on an ongoing basis.

    Muslims murder fellow-Muslims daily simply for the crime of going to the wrong mosque. Mass-killings by majority Sunnis of minority Shiites occur regularly in the form of suicide bombing attacks, RPG attacks, car bombings, and mass shooting attacks by Sunni hardliners against Shiite mosques and other gathering-places.

    In countries or localities where Muslims are a majority, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and other faiths are routinely attacked and killed in their places of worship and elsewhere, simply for not being Muslim.

    According to the careful count on the link below, since 9/11 there have been more than 34, 731 Islamic terror attacks around the world, and counting.

    According to this website, in the last 30 days, there were 113 Islamic attacks in 21 countries, in which 761 people were killed and 766 injured.

    Yet the West’s media, politicians, and academic establishment keep insisting that Islam is a peaceful religion hijacked by a handful of extremists. While Islamists and their West-hating socialist traitor enablers keep telling us what Islam is, Islam keeps showing us what it is by the behaviour of its most committed followers.

    While we should rightly deplore the fact that innocent Muslims were gunned down and killed in Christchurch, the co-religionists of those who lost their lives are far from innocent, as I have shown.

    Speaking on the date of the Christchurch mosque shootings, controversial Australian senator, Fraser Anning, reminds us: “While Muslims may have been the victims today, usually they are the perpetrators.”

    Around two-thirds of these attacks are what we might call “Purification Jihad” — hardliners taking out other Muslims deemed insufficiently pious and observant.

    One-third are attacks on non-Muslims to punish them for their kufr (“unbelief”).

    Spend some time looking at the record of such incidents on the link posted above, if you regard this assertion as unfounded.


  25. Ishmael Warner says:

    Friday’s events are not the first time Christchurch has been linked to mass murder and violence involving Muslims. That came earlier.

    Five years ago, Christchurch, and specifically the Al-Noor mosque, one of two targeted by Christchurch mosque shooter, Brenton Tarrant, was mentioned in news reports as the source of not one, but two international terrorists: Daryl Jones and Christopher Havard.

    No media anywhere is covering this. They want this story buried fast.

    Newshub: A Christchurch mosque has been linked to the drone killing of New Zealand al-Qaeda suspect Daryl Jones. Jones was killed alongside Australian Christopher Havard, whose parents said he was introduced to radical Islam at the Al-Noor mosque in Christchurch.

    Mosque leaders confirmed Havard stayed there and studied

    Incidentally, the article was recently removed from the Internet by the publisher, forcing anyone wanting to view it to hunt down an archive link.

    The deleted 2014 story quotes a mosque attendee who says, “A visiting speaker from Indonesia talked about violent jihad and plenty shared his views.”

    Which means the MSM is in blackout mode on this story. They’re actively trying to cover up the this mosque’s history of producing international terrorists.

    There’s only a small Islamic community in Christchurch, which has already thrown up not one, but TWO high level al-Qaeda operatives.

    Two so deeply involved in mass murder and entrenched in territory held by terrorist Sunni militias that they had to die in a US drone strike.

    The Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda that Jones and Havard were mobbed up with trained the Charlie Hebdo killers.

    It would appear that the leadership of Al-Noor mosque promotes or at least condones the expression of views towards non-Muslims that are far from benign.

    Predictably, when asked about this by the media, they denied it.

    Tafsirs are Commentaries on Islamic Jurisprudence. The most widely accepted Tafsir in Islam is Al Misri’s “Reliance of the Traveller,” written in the 14th Century. As Al-Misri states in the above matter: “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.”

    The Hadith collection of Sahih Bukhari is considered the most authoritative by Islamic scholars. Bukhari at V4B52N269 states:

    “Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah: ‘The Prophet said, War is Deceit.”

    Indeed, we are advised a Koran 3: 54 that Allah, himself, is “the best of deceivers.”

    If Muslims need to conceal their true objectives when they are a small minority, Allah allows them use deceit and trickery to accomplish this goal, even if that means lying about their own religion.

    Several forms of lying to non-Muslims are permitted under certain circumstances. These are typically to advance the cause of Islam, in some cases by gaining the trust of non-Muslims in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

    Muslims call this taqiyya, or “holy deception.”

    Three questions:

    In how many news reports have you read about the Al-Noor mosque’s prior association with Islamic terrorism?

    If you’d known that this mosque was a terrorist factory, would it have changed your feelings about the news at all?

    Finally, how does it make you feel to learn that the media has been not just ignoring these facts but deleting stories to hide them over the few days immediately following the Christchurch mosque shootings?


  26. Pingback: The personal blog of Mateen Elass – Very educational Article on Islam.

  27. Pingback: Can Islam Be Defeated? – Mohammedan Islam and the World

  28. Pingback: The schizophrenic muslim mind | US News Today

  29. Pingback: The schizophrenic Muslim mind – US

  30. Pingback: The schizophrenic Muslim mind – Now or Never

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s