This is Part 4 of 4. Read the Moderate Muslim Response to ISIS, Radical Islam PART 1 & Intro here first.
The continued purpose of this series is to look at the actual text that a religion holds to be holy, authoritative and true as way of determining the truth about that religion, rather than looking at the opinions or behaviors of those who follow that religion.
- Point 9 (pages 9-10) shows lots of Qur’an verses that specifically say it’s wrong to kill a Muslim, which yes is helpful for ISIS to hear, but for the rest of us reading it it only cements further that the Qur’an thinks it is okay to kill non-Muslims, for why else would it go to such lengths to explain specifically not to kill Muslims?
- Page 11, Point 10: The Open Letter again attempts to show that attacking non-Muslims is only to be done when they have pre-emptively attacked Muslims first. Al-Tawbah, 9:13 is used, “Will you not fight a people who broke their oaths and intended to expel the Messenger – initiating against you first?” But if you go to the beginning of Al-Tawbah chapter 9 to the setting of this verse, we find verses 1-2, non-Muslims who had a 4-month TREATY with the Muslims, so obviously they weren’t attacking the Muslims. But then after the 4 months is over, the Qur’an in verse 5 gives free reign to butcher them if they don’t convert to Islam: “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” Further undermining the Open Letter’s hollow point here is that the “broke their oaths” being referred to in verse 13 that they quote is not referring to breaking a peace treaty, which is what they claim, but to breaking their oath of converting to Muslim, as the two verses prior clearly state: Al-Tawbah, 9:11-12 But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, then they are your brothers in religion…But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight the leaders of disbelief – for surely their oaths are nothing to them – so that they may stop (evil actions). —So in other words, it’s referring to people who repented and became Muslim, then broke this Muslim oath, leaving their faith. For which of course the Qur’an says you have free reign to then kill them, something we see in the very next verse (9:14), “Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people.”
- Page 13, Point #16: The moderate Muslims’ Open Letter states, Hudud punishments are fixed in the Qur’an and Hadith and are unquestionably obligatory in Islamic Law. These punishments include: (Note: zina refers to people having sex outside of marriage…**Capital punishments by sword/crucifixion (for highway robbery with homicide), **by stoning (for zina by a married offender), **Amputation of hands or feet (for theft and highway robbery without homicide), **Flogging with a varying number of strokes (zina (this refers un-married offenders), false accusations of zina and spreading rumours of zina’). –You’ve got to be asking yourself at this point, “How is the Open Letter going to try to get out of this one?” The Open Letter says these punishments must be applied with clarification, warning, exhortation and meeting the burden of proof; and not in a cruel manner (How you amputate someone for stealing or crucify or flog someone in a non-cruel way is beyond me). The first thing that must hit the objective reader is, How can you possibly agree that these are unquestionably obligatory punishments?? I don’t care how much burden of proof you say is needed, this is barbaric, ungodly, and ridiculous. There is also not one reference to the Qur’an in the entire paragraph devoted to this point–all it does is gives some uncited examples of when these punishments very briefly weren’t used in Islam’s past, such as when there was a famine. The paragraph for Point #16 is synonymous with saying, “The Qur’an is God’s almighty holy word, the Qur’an says XYZ, but here’s our opinion on why it doesn’t really say that, even though that’s exactly what it says. So we disagree with a whole bunch of the Qur’an, but we still say it’s God’s almighty holy word.” One has to wonder at this point, why do Moderate Muslims insist on clinging to the Qur’an like this when they obviously don’t believe many of the things it says?
- Page 13, Point #17 speaks against beheadings, saying they are forbidden by Islamic Law, but they give no reference for this. Meanwhile, the Qur’an commands to cut off the heads and fingertips of unbelievers in Al-Anfal 8:12-13 “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.” That is because they opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger – indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” We must remember the moderate Muslims’ response to this will be that these were temporary commands or restricted to a single battle Muhammad was in. But if it were the Qur’an or Muhammad’s intent that these were to be temporary commands, THE QUR’AN WOULD HAVE SAID SO. Which it simply never does. In addition, Muhammad 47:4-6 of the Qur’an tells us that not only are non-believers to be beheaded in battle, but any Muslim who dies during these beheading battles for Allah will automatically go to Paradise as a result of their dying for Allah: “So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allah to continue in carrying out Jihad against the disbelievers till they embrace Islam (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allah’s Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost, to top He will guide them and set right their state. And admit them to Paradise which He has made known to them (i.e. they will know their places in Paradise more than they used to know their houses in the world).”
- Page 16, Point #24: In an effort to show ISIS that they should not be asking Muslims from across the globe to immigrate to lands under ISIS control, the Open Letter actually reveals Muhammad saying that jihad (killing of non-Muslims) and war are to remain, which directly disproves the argument the Open Letter has been making the entire time that these commands were temporary and circumstantial to Muhammad’s life. It’s in a Hadith written around 500 years after his death rather than in the Qur’an, but seeing as it’s used by the Open Letter to prove their point, must be a verse they would give God’s authority to. “There is no emigration after the Conquest [of Mecca], but jihad and [its] intention [remain]. And when you are called to war, march forward. The Hadith book this quote is from, the Kitab al-Jihad, was written in 1105, and was said to have been originally quoted in the 9th century.
- Page 16, Conclusion: The conclusion of the Open Letter attempts to show that Islam is a religion of mercy. The verse from the Qur’an used to try to show this is Al-Isra’, 17:82 and only the first half of the verse is quoted: “And we reveal of the Qur’an that which is a cure, and a mercy for believers…” So Islam a religion of mercy, right? Wrong. If you’re Muslim, it is a religion of mercy for you. But if you’re not Muslim, look out (As the rest of the Qur’an has already clearly stated, you will be beheaded, dismembered, crucified, etc.)! The rest of Al-Isra’, 17:82 which the Open Letter left out, reads: “and it increases the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers) nothing but loss.”
Author of Beyond the Battle: A man's guide to his identity in Christ in an oversexualized world
Host of the The Flip Side Podcast
Join an online men's small group led by Noah and team at BeyondTheBattle.net
Latest posts by Noah Filipiak (see all)
- Ep. 24, Interview with Tyler St. Clair on dealing with the grind and insecurity of pastoring + race & the Church - January 17, 2020
- Yes, You Can Relearn how to View Women as People Rather than Objects to be Consumed - January 9, 2020
- Ep. 23: State of the Podcast + How to Live for Christ in this Messed Up World - December 31, 2019