by Solomon Wright
I propose an analysis of the ideology of Islam. Notice, I do not title Islam a ‘religion.’ To most people, religion, is a personal belief of a Superhuman Being, God, and it affects how you believe and live. If you want to change your beliefs, fine, change your beliefs.
However, in Islam, you are ‘born’ a believer in Islam, a Muslim; whether you like it or not. And if you want to change your beliefs, BAM, you are an apostate to be killed! To support that, let me quote the Reliance of the Traveler and Tools for the Worshiper, A CLASSIC MANUAL OF ISLAMIC SACRED LAW BY AHMAD IBN NAQIB AL-MISRI (Died 1368 AD) Edited and Translated by Sheik Nuh Ha Mim Keller, the Islamic book of Sharia Law, the law that rules the lives of Muslims :
“o8.0 APOSTASY FROM ISLAM (RIDDA)
(O: Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst. It may come about through sarcasm, as when someone is told, “Trim your nails, it is sunna,” and he replies, “I would not do it even if it were,” as opposed to when some circumstance exists which exonerates him of having committed apostasy, such as when his tongue runs away with him, or when he is quoting someone, or says it out of fear.)
o8.1 When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
o8.2 In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representative) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.
o8.3 If he is a freeman, no one besides the caliph or his representative may kill him. If someone else kills him, the killer is disciplined (def: o17) (O: for arrogating the caliph’s prerogative and encroaching upon his rights, as this is one of his duties).
o8.4 There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (O: or any expiation, since it is killing someone who
deserves to die).
o8.5 If he apostatizes from Islam and returns several times, it (O: i.e. his return to Islam, which occurs
when he states the two Testifications of Faith (def: o8.7(12))) is accepted from him, though he is
o8.6 (A: If a spouse in a consummated marriage apostatizes from Islam, the couple are separated for a
waiting period consisting of three intervals between menstruations. If the spouse returns to Islam before
the waiting period ends, the marriage is not annulled but is considered to have continued the whole time (dis: m7.4).)”
After reading that, is it still well founded to call Islam a religion? This is why I call Islam an ideology.
Put both of these on the table: the USA’s First Amendment, and Sharia Law. The First Amendment says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Sharia Law says: When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
Now, when the “free exercise thereof” violates other laws like: 18 U.S. Code § 1111 – Murder, one weigh the effects: murder or free exercise of religion. If I need to stress the weight difference to you, YOU have a problem!
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob says: “DO NOT KILL.”
ALLAH SAYS TO KILL KAFIRS (me.)
A. What does Islam’s history say about Islam’s future?
For a quick look at the First and Second Jihads, I found a nice trace of history on this web-page:
Then on another web-page, history is covered too.
MUHAMMAD’S KINGDOM & THE CALIPHATE
Muhammad’s ministry lasted for 23 years, from 610 to his death from poisoning in 633. During that time, with the exception of his colossal Satanic Verses error, he proclaimed and practiced Islam faithfully. Those 23 years were divided between two cities: 13 years in Mecca and 10 years in Medina.
Muhammad’s ministry in Mecca was primarily a spiritual one. In several aspects it paralleled Jesus’s ministry. At this time he did not seek to establish a physical kingdom of Allah. (I know that Allah means God and Arab Christians use it. Here I am using Allah to signify Islam’s God). Allah had told Muhammad that he was not to force men to become Muslims:
“And if your Lord had enforced His Will, surely, all who are in the earth would have believed together. Will you then force men to become believers?” Quran 10:99
Muhammad had little success in Mecca. His few followers were weak and oppressed. Any use of force against the Quraysh, the dominant tribe in Mecca, would result in their deaths.
However a few years before he left Mecca he gained new converts in Medina. These followers preached Islam and gained many converts there. Soon Muhammad had a sizeable body of Muslims in Medina. Many were men of war and at the Second Pledge of Aqabah they pledged their swords in Muhammad’s defense.
Throughout his ministry, as Muhammad’s circumstances changed Allah’s revelations changed, and Islam changed. And these fighting men represented a significant change! Unlike his followers in Mecca the Medina Muslims were not weak or oppressed. They were armed and knew how to fight. On cue, shortly before he left Mecca and fled to Medina, Allah gave Muhammad a new revelation, the “Order to Fight.” Ibn Ishaq states:
The apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed to shed blood before the second Aqaba. He had simply been ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and forgive the ignorant….
…He gave permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself against those who wronged them and treated them badly.1
The “Order to Fight” is described on pages 212 and 213. Different Islamic scholars have differing opinions as to which verses exactly comprise this revelation (most all of the various verses are similar), but here the general text is stated as 22:39-41 and 2:193. Below are two of the four verses
Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, … 22:39
Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil-doers. 2:193
The order to fight allowed both defensive and offensive fighting, (offensive to end idolatry and spiritual rebellion). Many of the non-violent verses in the Quran were now “abrogated” or canceled.
Muhammad summed up Allah’s directive:
It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.2
I want to emphasize this: If you want to understand the violence in the Islamic would today you must start here. Muhammad’s statement above is a foundation, a “Maxwell’s Equation,” for understanding the role violence plays in Islam.
Muhammad intended to set up a kingdom of Allah. People would have to testify that Muhammad was Allah’s Messenger and they would have to obey various aspects of Islamic law. This was not optional. People had to either submit to Islam or fight the Muslims. Muhammad, and implicitly his followers, were ordered to fight non-Muslims until they either converted or submitted to Islam’s rule (as Christians and Jews had to pay extortion and submit in humility per 9:29).
Muhammad establishes Allah’s kingdom on earth.
Muhammad heeded this new direction from Allah and put it into effect quickly. He obeyed Allah and fought non-Muslims until they bent the knee to him. He established Allah’s kingdom on earth. How did he accomplish this?
Shortly after arriving in Medina Muhammad began to send out his soldiers to raid and pillage non-Muslim villages and trade caravans. Naturally this led to them murdering non-Muslims. Muhammad’s thefts and murders led to war. Tabari records:
This incident had provoked (a state of) war between the Messenger of God and Quraysh and was the beginning of the fighting in which they inflicted casualties upon one another…3
Tabari notes that it was Muhammad, not the Quraysh, that started the war. During the next ten years the breath, width, and depth of violence increased. Below is a general progression of Muhammad’s efforts to obey Allah and spread Islam’s domain through the use of force, or threat of force, primarily:
1) raids on non-Muslim villages and caravans
2) murders and assassinations throughout the Hijaz
3) targeted religious persecutions of several Jewish tribes within and without Medina
4) military conquests, subjection, rapes, massacres, and total destruction of non-Muslim Arab tribes
5) military campaigns to spread Islam’s domination far and wide.
Muhammad did not win all of his battles but he won most of them. People feared Muhammad and the Muslims. Muhammad’s military leaders proclaimed: “Accept Islam and you will be safe.” People understood that if they did not accept Islam then they were fair game to be attacked, plundered, tortured, enslaved, raped, and murdered. Consequently many Arab tribes used the “if you can’t beat em, join em” approach to becoming Muslim. They didn’t want to be plundered, have their wives stolen, enslaved and raped, they didn’t want their children made into slaves, they didn’t want to die. Why not join Islam then? And all of this occurred under Muhammad’s direction and approving eye.
You can find all of this here: Articles on Terrorism and Violence
Key articles are:
The trail of oppression and blood behind Muhammad grew ever wide. Muhammad took Allah’s command seriously and labored to fulfill that command: he spread and established his Islam, the kingdom of Allah. While he lived no one dared disobey him. He ruled Allah’s kingdom firmly, continued to obey Allah, and fight men until Islam ruled over them. He and his followers engaged in jihad, holy warfare, to spread his kingdom’s domain. (Jihad means struggle or effort, but its theological definition is “holy warfare” see this article, section 4: The Verse of the Sword: Sura 9:5 and Jihad )
He died about a year and a half after his conquest of Mecca. He was an eminently successful man: he had wealth, power, fame, respect, sex with many beautiful women, both wives and slave concubines. He had overcome incredible challenges and eventually subjected or crushed his enemies. Muhammad died at the apex of his power and he established Allah’s kingdom on the bodies of those who opposed or rejected his claim of prophethood.
But what happened after Muhammad died? We’ll take a look at the kingdom of Allah in action. What was its power? What were its effects?
An examination of the Caliphate, the continuing “Kingdom of Allah.”
Muhammad left behind him a body of men that knew him, loved him, and obeyed him. They would fight, kill, and die for him because they believed him to be a true prophet. They had memorized his Quran, they recorded anecdotes about his life and teachings (hadith), and they imitated his lifestyle (sunnah) earnestly. There was no shortage of knowledge about Muhammad’s example and his commands to love one another as brothers. The men that led the Muslims after his death were not a pack of novices; they knew him and his will intimately.
Immediately following Muhammad’s death the Muslims began to quarrel amongst themselves over who would be their leader. The original Muslims from Mecca, (the Muhajirun, “immigrants”), wanted one of their own to assume command as Caliph, while the Medina Muslims, (the Ansar, “helpers”), wanted one of their own, Sa’d bin ‘Ubadah, to be the leader. An ugly argument broke out and each side cursed and threatened to kill the other. Punches were thrown, and swords drawn but not used. Umar proclaimed that Abu Bakr should be the leader and demanded that everyone give him the oath of allegiance willingly or unwillingly. Finally the Ansar agreed to have Abu Bakr as ruler.
Quite an inauspicious start for them wasn’t it? So much for the Muslim brotherhood that Muhammad taught and commanded. Not much to be proud of. This start was a portent of things to come.
Also following Muhammad’s death many tribes that had been subjected, coerced, or forced into becoming Muslims under compulsion, “willingly or unwillingly”, left Islam to one degree or another. Many were not at war with the Muslims. They wanted to live in peace and freedom instead of being forced to be Muslims. However, under Islam they were viewed as apostates and Muhammad commanded the killing of apostates. Consequently these tribes that refused to walk to Abu Bakr’s Islamic talk were attacked, re-subjected, or slaughtered. Tens of thousands were killed by Abu Bakr’s Islamic army. These wars are known as the wars of apostasy, (Ridda Wars). Tabari volume 10 describes these brutal, imperial, wars in detail.
Some people doubt that the Muslims used compulsion and forced people to submit to Islam. But that use of force is documented clearly:
“You [Muslims] were the most severe people against his enemies who were among you, and the most troublesome to his enemies who were not from among you, so that the Arabs became upright in God’s cause, willingly or unwillingly, and the distant one submitted in abject humiliation until through you God made great slaughter in the earth for His Apostle, and by your swords the Arabs were abased for him.”4
Muslims quote 2:256 as saying that there is no compulsion in religion but that verse was spoken for a specific time and a specific situation and it was definitely not a universal command with universal application.
Abu Bakr continued Muhammad’s methods of war and oppression to establish Allah’s kingdom and compel or force people to submit to Islam.
That of course was an external trait of Allah’s kingdom – conquering all that is non-Islamic. But what about affairs of the heart? How was Allah’s kingdom internalized? How did it compare to Jesus’s “kingdom of God?”
The answer to his is best displayed in how Muhammad’s closest followers behaved and acted towards each other. The early Christians were generally humble and devoted to each other and they served each other. How about Muhammad’s family? There we should expect to see the fullest measure of Allah’s kingdom in their lives and hearts.
But you would be surprised to see what actually happened. Family and friends turned upon each other. Betrayals, murders, assassinations, lust for power, greed, etc. all were prominent in the lives of Muhammad’s closest family and friends.
For example, Muhammad had amassed a sizeable amount of wealth prior to his death. Before his death Muhammad established that a large portion of it be used in support of the Muslim community and that his wives be provided for but he also ordered that his descendants were not to inherit any of the wealth because he believed that is what the Jewish prophets of old had done (he was wrong in this belief). Consequently, upon becoming Caliph, Abu Bakr refused to distribute any of the wealth to Muhammad descendants.
This led to deep rooted strife and bickering. Muhammad’s daughter, Fatimah, her husband Ali, and her relative al-Abbas, bickered with Abu Bakr and demanded the wealth. He refused to give them a nickel. As a result Fatimah and the other hated him deeply. Fatimah died six months after Muhammad. Ali’s hate was such that he did not even tell Abu Bakr about her death nor allow him to attend her burial.5
You can see from this episode that these people had not been transformed from their carnal selves. Muhammad’s kingdom had changed their outsides, they grew wealthy and powerful, but their hearts were unregenerate and sinful.
Abu Bakr was Caliph up to his death about a year and a half later. He was Muhammad’s best friend and knew him best. Certainly Abu Bakr did what Muhammad expected him to do. Abu Bakr shed a river of blood to spread and maintain Allah’s kingdom, Islam.
Abu Bakr was wise enough to preclude the violence and stress of a leader’s unexpected death and he decreed that Umar, (who was previously Muhammad’s second closest friend), would succeed him as Caliph. Umar sent his armies out to conquer non-Muslim lands and they conquered Syria, Palestine, Iraq, Persia, and Egypt. (Persia suffered especially under the Arab’s oppression). These were conquests by the sword. Wars and battles were fought but over time the Muslims conquered. Islam was certainly not then a religion of peace, it was instead a religion of power, force, and brutality. Tens of thousands were killed and hundreds of thousands were subjected by force to Islam’s rule. Those that converted to Islam were treated much better than the non-Muslims, and through this oppressive bigotry Islam coerced people to convert.
Uthman assumed leadership after Umar died. Uthman’s claim to fame is that he issued the official recension of the Quran we have today. There were many different Qurans in existence. They were mostly similar but also had notable differences. These differences caused severe divisions amongst the Muslims. Uthman fixed this by having an official version of the Quran made and ordered other competing Qurans to be burned.
Uthman’s armies conquered much of Armenia, pushed further NW into Asia, and subjected Cyprus. During his reign the Muslims had become very powerful and wealthy.
I believe that in Uthman’s death we see Islam’s truest fruit. Political corruption set in and many Muslims became disgruntled and upset with Uthman. Eventually large groups of these disgruntled Muslims from several Muslim regions went to Medina to confront Uthman. One of these groups was from Egypt and they wanted Ali to assume the Caliphate.
Ali, Muhammad’s son in law, was responsible to protect the aged Uthman. Initially he did post guards and fulfilled his responsibility.
However, deep down Ali seethed with bitterness and resentment because he felt that he should have been made successor to Muhammad. Instead he bit his tongue as one by one, Abu Bakr, Umar, and then Uthman, assumed the role. His bitterness rooted itself ever deeper in his heart while he coveted the wealth, status, and power of being Caliph.
The confrontation between the disgruntled Muslim gangs and Uthman took a turn for the worse. It was at this point Ali withdrew his family and guards responsible for protecting Uthman. Uthman was then attacked and murdered. Ali’s men were nowhere to be found.
It’s important to note that one of the assailants was Abu Bakr’s son, Muhammad b. Abi Bakr. Here is Tabari’s account:
Muhammad b. Abi Bakr, came with thirteen men and went up to Uthman. He seized his beard and shook it until I heard his teeth chattering. Muhammad b. Abi Bakr said, “Muawiyah was no help to you, nor was Ibn Amir, nor your letters.” Uthman said, “Let go of my beard, son of my brother! Let go of my beard!” Then I saw Ibn Abi Bakr signaling with his eye to one of the rebels. He came over to him with a broad iron headed arrow and stabbed him in the head with it…. They gathered round him and killed him.”6
Conversely, imagine this: Jesus’s apostles hating, fighting with, and murdering each other. Imagine Peter’s son murdering Thomas. It would be quite horrible; it would be a dark and evil situation.
The story actually gets worse, darker, and more evil. After Uthman’s death there was an outcry to punish the murderers. With the support of the Egyptian gang Ali assumed the Caliphate. To make a long story short some prominent Muslims, Talhah, al-Zubayr, and Aisha, Muhammad’s child bride, started the first civil war in Islam. Ali and his army marched against them and they fought. This battle is known as “The Battle of the Camel.” Ali was triumphant. Talhah and al-Zubayr were killed and Aisha put under house arrest. Casualty figures range from ten to twenty thousand killed.
I could give many more examples of Muhammad’s “Companions” murdering other “Companions” for power or greed. Perhaps its apex is the battle of Siffin, or perhaps its apex is when Yazid, a Muslim leader in Damascus and the grandson of Muhammad’s arch-enemy Abu Sufyan, killed Muhammad’s grandson, Husain. Husain’s head was brought to Yazid and he and his companions desecrated it.
If you want to read about the events following Muhammad death you can read this series of articles: Islam’s Royal Family, Part 1, Muhammad’s Wealth
Better yet get Tabari’s History and read it for yourself. Don’t let anyone do your thinking for you. Read and study the Islamic source materials for yourself. Start with volume 10: “The History of al-Tabari Vol. 10: The Conquest of Arabia: The Riddah Wars A.D. 632-633/A.H. 11”
This was a brief, general comparison of two kingdoms: Christ’s versus Muhammad’s. I wanted to present just how different these men, their methods, and their fruits are.
Jesus’s rule is an internal presence that changes men’s hearts for the better. Jesus’s kingdom is established spiritually by persuasion and conviction. Clearly Christ’s rule transformed men’s hearts and its evidence is found in the lives of the early Christians who won over much of the Roman Empire without the sword but by their faith and love. It continues today in the church and in the lives of dedicated Christians. The evidence of that kingdom-rule is disciples having “love for one another.” Without that love, as demonstrated by those foolish monks, the kingdom of God is absent. Its strength and presence has varied over time but it has been present since His time on earth.
Muhammad’s rule is an external force that changes men’s outward lives but does not have the power to transform men’s hearts towards godliness. Once Muhammad’s personal rule was removed by his death, his companions, Islam’s leaders, proved themselves to be unchanged, carnal, and sinful. The early Muslims hearts were selfish, bitter, and cruel. Their lusts and desires drove them to betray and murder their friends.
Muhammad’s kingdom was established and maintained physically primarily by the sword. It is both a religious and geo-political kingdom. It institutionalizes armies, taxes, familial and cultural rules, commercial laws, etc. It has all the constructs of a governed community and his kingdom continues today in one degree or another in both Muslim’s lives and various Muslim-majority countries.
Muhammad was ordered by Allah to fight men to bend the knee to his Islam. This included defense against enemy attacks and offensive actions against enemies in order to force them to submit to Muhammad’s rule. Muhammad’s message was clear: “Accept Islam and you will be safe.” Further, Muhammad’s kingdom was maintained by force of arms. When various Arab tribes left Islam, for various reasons, they were attacked and forced to re-submit to Islam or die fighting. Like spilled blood on a white sheet Muhammad’s kingdom spread throughout the world. During the first 100 years of Islam Muhammad’s kingdom spread and grew into one of the world’s largest empires primarily through the force of arms.
I end with three quotes from Islamic sources. The first quote concerns Iraqi Christians, who were once Christian, converted to Islam, but then left Islam to follow Christ again. Their words sum up my argument perfectly:
Among them were many Christians who had accepted Islam, but when dissension had developed in Islam had said, “By God, our religion from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.” And they returned to their former religion. Al-Khirrit met them and said to them, “Woe unto you! Do you know the precept of Ali regarding any Christian who accepts Islam and then reverts to Christianity? By God he will not hear anything they say, he will not consider any excuse, he will not accept any repentance, and he will not summon them to it. His precept regarding them is immediate cutting off of the head when he gets hold of them.”7
This second quote concerns what some of Muhammad’s Companions did to an 80 year old women whose tribe had fought the Muslims:
The Muslims were initially defeated by the Fazara. The wounded Muslim leader swore vengeance. After he recovered he went out and attacked the Fazara again. One very old woman was captured. Here is the account:
“….and Umm Qirfa Fatima was taken prisoner. She was a very old woman, wife of Malik. Her daughter and Abdullah Masada were also taken. Zayd ordered Qays to kill Umm Qirfa and he killed her cruelly (Tabari, by putting a rope to her two legs and to two camels and driving them until they rent her in two.)8
This third quote shows just how Muhammad regarded those who mock him (bear this in mind when you consider the Charlie Hebdo massacre). This involves a Muslim man who murdered his own slave because she mocked Muhammad.
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.9
In all three instances above we see the murder, the brutality, the cruelty, that was part of Muhammad’s Islam. If it was good enough for Muhammad then it’s good enough for the Muslims today.
Part of this article’s title is “Is ISIS Islamic?” In order to arrive at a logical, conclusive answer we need to establish what constitutes “Islamic” to establish a point of reference. We need only examine Muhammad’s words and deeds to define “Islamic” and I’ve shown that Muhammad’s Islam, real Islam, is evil, sinful, and inhumane. I also wanted to contrast Jesus and Muhammad. Far too often ignorant people conflate the two and equate them because both were great religious leaders. These two men were diametrically opposed in both their teachings and actions.
Continue with Part 2: Muhammad Did It, ISIS Does It
1 Ibn Ishaq, “Sirat Rasulallah”, compiled by A. Guillaume as “The Life of Muhammad”, Oxford, London, 1955, page 212
2 Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, “Sahih Muslim”, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971, translated by A. Siddiqi, volume 1, #33
3 al-Tabari, “The History of al-Tabari”, State University of New York Press,” volume 7, page 29
4 al-Tabari, “The History of al-Tabari”, State University of New York Press” volume 10, page 2
5 For a description of this event see: al-Tabari, “The History of al-Tabari”, State University of New York Press volume 9, 1993, pages 196, 197
6 al-Tabari, “The History of al-Tabari”, State University of New York Press,” volume 15, pages 190, 191
7 al-Tabari, “The History of al-Tabari”, State University of New York Press, volume 17, pages 187, 188
8 Ibn Ishaq, “Sirat Rasulallah”, compiled by A. Guillaume as “The Life of Muhammad”, Oxford, London, 1955 page 665
9 Abu Dawud, Suliman, “Sunan”, al-Madina, New Delhi, 1985, translated by A. Hasan, Book 38, Number 4348
[First published: 19 January 2015]
[Last updated: 20 October 2015]
The history of the Islam ideology proves beyond any shadow of doubt, to a logical, rational person, that Islam is violent, evil, inhumane and cruel. Is there any doubt of Islam’s intentions? These past pages show the 1st and 2nd Jihads and you can Google ‘Third Jihad’ and see what appears.
I assume that the attacks in Paris, San Bernardino, Ft. Hood, etc., will continue until they obtain their desire of controlling the WHOLE WORLD!