"The End Times and the Islamic AntiChrist" by Gary DeMar

[hells_unicorn]

Not in the real world, because it's the fastest growing religion in the world. You and your comrades are failing miserably in your endeavor.

What comrades do you speak of? The Neo-cons don't have the stomach nor the theological inclination to subtract the redundant "radical" adjective from Islam when dealing with what it does when it gets a hold of an armed person amid a group of unarmed people. Apart from some isolated groups within the so-called Alt. Right movement and maybe Milo Yiannopoulos, nobody wants to deal with Islam in the abstract.

I'm not one of these Dispensationalists who thinks that the End Times will be here tomorrow, but I am well aware of the history of Islam, it has had a few expansionist periods, and then eventually someone within Christendom figures it out and it gets pushed back to the accursed land that it first sprung from. If I were a betting man I'd put the odds on Putin or whoever takes his place as the head of Russia taking care of much of the Islam problem, and likely his biggest obstacle will be the United States, unless our sad, culturally decaying Empire has a spiritual rebirth of some kind and elects someone with an iota of common sense.

Personally, I'd be tickled pink to check my favorite news sites one morning and learn that Turkey has been conquered by Russia and that the Patriarch of Constantinople has been liberated from his centuries long captivity. Between the eventual fall of the Papacy and the end of Islam, the world will be a far more peaceful place.

P.S. - Islam is expanding primarily because their adherents have children, whereas "tolerant" and progressive people tend to abort their's before they draw their first breath. It's a sad reality, but a temporary one if I have anything to say about it.

[Theocrat]

This quote is absurd and erroneous on a number of levels. Jihaad means "struggle", not to submit. Secondly and perhaps most importantly, a non-aggressive nation is not considered "at war with Islam", and it's in fact not permissible to wage war on a peaceful nation in that regard.

‏8:60 واعدوا لهم مااستطعتم من قوة ومن رباط الخيل ترهبون به عدو الله وعدوكم واخرين من دونهم لاتعلمونهم الله يعلمهم وماتنفقوا من شئ في سبيل الله يوف اليكم وانتم لاتظلمون
‏8:61 وان جنحوا للسلم فاجنح لها وتوكل على الله انه هو السميع العليم

Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them. Whatsoever ye spend in the way of Allah it will be repaid to you in full, and ye will not be wronged.
And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in Allah. Lo! He, even He, is the Hearer, the Knower.

In order for an Ameer to wage a war against non-believers, he must have a legitimate casus belli.

What, pray tell, is a "casus belli"?

[Muwahid]

What, pray tell, is a "casus belli"?

Why ask me something you can search for yourself?

It's a legitimate cause for war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_belli

[pcosmar]

It's a legitimate cause for war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_belli

as opposed to illegitimate wars,, that have been clearly on display.. (Iraq,Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria)

[Theocrat]

Why ask me something you can search for yourself?

It's a legitimate cause for war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_belli

Yes, I could have looked it up, myself, but I was interested in your view on it, in relation to Islamic theology. Are there any other passages in the Qur'an where casus belli is taught? Is that principle derived originally from Islamic thought?

[hells_unicorn]

It's a legitimate cause for war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_belli

How do you qualify a legitimate cause for war? From my vantage point, this is impossible to accomplish unless the magistrate has the mandate of defending the true religion, which Islam is not.

[dannno]

This quote is absurd and erroneous on a number of levels. Jihaad means "struggle", not to submit. Secondly and perhaps most importantly, a non-aggressive nation is not considered "at war with Islam", and it's in fact not permissible to wage war on a peaceful nation in that regard.

‏8:60 واعدوا لهم مااستطعتم من قوة ومن رباط الخيل ترهبون به عدو الله وعدوكم واخرين من دونهم لاتعلمونهم الله يعلمهم وماتنفقوا من شئ في سبيل الله يوف اليكم وانتم لاتظلمون
‏8:61 وان جنحوا للسلم فاجنح لها وتوكل على الله انه هو السميع العليم

Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them. Whatsoever ye spend in the way of Allah it will be repaid to you in full, and ye will not be wronged.
And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in Allah. Lo! He, even He, is the Hearer, the Knower.

In order for an Ameer to wage a war against non-believers, he must have a legitimate casus belli.

Is that from the first book or the second book?

The Bible has two books, the first book is more violent and the second book is more benevolent - the second book takes precedent over the first book in modern times.

In Islam, I heard there are two books, the first more peaceful the second more violent, and the second takes precedent in modern times.

[Muwahid]

Is that from the first book or the second book?

The Bible has two books, the first book is more violent and the second book is more benevolent - the second book takes precedent over the first book in modern times.

In Islam, I heard there are two books, the first more peaceful the second more violent, and the second takes precedent in modern times.

There is only one book. Islamic critics have postulated that in the beginning Islam was very peaceful, but as Muhammad gained power, it became violent and that the peaceful verses were abrogated. This is actually untrue. The verse I posted was revealed during the time of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah (only four years before Muhammad died)

Muhammad also said at this point in time: إِنَّهُ سَيَكُونُ بَعْدِي اخْتِلَافٌ أَوْ أَمْرٌ فَإِنِ اسْتَطَعْتَ أَنْ يَكُونَ السِّلْمَ فَافْعَل (There will be conflicts that will occur after me, if you have a way to settle them with peace, do so)

So there's actually a pretty consistent policy in Islam where you may only attack aggressors, and if they want peace try to negotiate peace.

[dannno]

There is only one book. Islamic critics have postulated that in the beginning Islam was very peaceful, but as Muhammad gained power, it became violent and that the peaceful verses were abrogated. This is actually untrue. The verse I posted was revealed during the time of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah (only four years before Muhammad died)

Muhammad also said at this point in time: إِنَّهُ سَيَكُونُ بَعْدِي اخْتِلَافٌ أَوْ أَمْرٌ فَإِنِ اسْتَطَعْتَ أَنْ يَكُونَ السِّلْمَ فَافْعَل (There will be conflicts that will occur after me, if you have a way to settle them with peace, do so)

So there's actually a pretty consistent policy in Islam where you may only attack aggressors, and if they want peace try to negotiate peace.

Did Muhammad really consummate with a 9 year old girl?

[Muwahid]

Did Muhammad really consummate with a 9 year old girl?

Consummation of marriage must be when the individual is post-pubescent and able to bear children. That's the minimal age requirement in Islam. Such practice was very common in this time period but Islam made it forbidden to consummate with anyone prior to puberty or anyone who physically cannot have sex.

As opposed to today, children were reared during this time period to be married at a young age, such a practice wasn't controversial and Islam restricted the age to puberty.

[Danke]

[Muwahid]

1. She claims Muhammad was unsuccessful for 12 years in Mecca, so decided to go to Medina

FALSE

The first migration wasn't to Yetrhib (Medina) at all. Muhammad was very successful among the poor and the slaves. However because of their status they would be tortured and killed by their masters or others. About 100 of them migrated to Abyssinia and were granted asylum there. The rest including Muhammad and others among the Qurayshi clans (Abu Bakr, Umar ibn al Khattab, etc.) stayed in Mecca.

Muhammad taught a small group of people from Bani Khazraj (From Medina) about Islam, they converted and returned. Muhammad sent with them Musaab ibn Umair, to teach Islam. The next year they came with others, who also wished to convert. Following that year, over seventy men came to pledge allegiance to Muhammad and request that he come to Medina because there was a lot of bloodshed between the Arab tribes and the Jewish tribes.

فرحل إليه منا سبعون رجلاً، حتى قدموا عليه في الموسم، فواعدناه شعب العقبة، فاجتمعنا عليه من رجل ورجلين حتى توافينا، فقلنا: يا رسول الله! علام نبايعك؟
Seventy men left until they reached him during Eid, we met with the people of Aqabah and gathered by one, and two, until we were all there then we asked O Messenger of Allah, shall we make allegiance to you? (Ahmad)

Cliffs:
- Many among the poor converted to Islam, were oppressed, and left for Abyssinia
- The Yethribis converted in large numbers, and sought Muhammad's help
- Muhammad migrated to Medinah with many companions

Too be continued. After that she bounced around referencing things that happened centuries later not under Muhammad, mostly very untrue lies or things taken out of context of course.

[Muwahid]

2. Muhammad copied from the Jews but when this failed, he made them Dhimmis

FALSE

She here is taking a grain of truth, such as the Muslims facing Jerusalem rather than Mecca, and turning into "copying" from the Jews and then she suggests that this didn't work so Muhammad turned on them... this is completely ahistorical. Quote from Tafseer ibn Kathir regarding the Qiblah (prayer direction):

قال علي بن أبي طلحة عن ابن عباس : كان أول ما نسخ من القرآن القبلة ، وذلك أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما هاجر إلى المدينة ، وكان أكثر أهلها اليهود ، فأمره الله أن يستقبل بيت المقدس ، ففرحت اليهود ، فاستقبلها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بضعة عشر شهرا ، وكان يحب قبلة إبراهيم فكان يدعو إلى الله وينظر إلى السماء ، فأنزل الله : ( قد نرى تقلب وجهك في السماء ) إلى قوله : ( فولوا وجوهكم شطره )

Narrated by Ali bin Abi Talha from Ibn Abbass: The first abrogation in the Quran was about the Qiblah when the Messenger of Allah migrated to Medina and most of its inhabitants were Jews. So Allah commanded the Muslims to pray towards Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem); the Jews were delighted by this, so the messenger of Allah faced it for ten and some months. However He liked to face the Qiblah of Abraham, so he used to supplicate to God looking towards the sky.

[This is when an Islamic verse was revealed 2:144 instructing the prophet to turn towards Mecca as he desired]

The Qur'an further explains: وما جعلنا القبلة التي كنت عليها إلا لنعلم من يتبع الرسول ممن ينقلب على عقبيه (And We made the Qiblah which you used to face (Jerusalem), only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels) 2:143

So we learn the Muslims changed their Qiblah even though Muhammad disliked this, and it was revealed that this was in order to test the Jews on whether or not they would follow Muhammad based on traditions or based on faith.

---

So now the more important question remains: How did Muhammad treat the Jews after the Qiblah was turned back to Mecca. Did he suddenly become very anti-Jewish as the person in the video suggests?

The best place to start is the Constitution of Medina which is perhaps the best way to describe the relationship between the Muslims and the non-Muslims. This constitution was never breached by the Muslims, even after the Jews attempted to oust the Muslims. It reads:

لليهود دينهم وللمسلمين دينهم ، مواليهم وأنفسهم ، إلا من ظلم نفسه وأثم ، فإنه لا يوتِغ – أي : يُهلِك - إلا نفسه وأهل بيته
The Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs, their loyalists and their persons. Except for those who behave unjustly, for they hurt themselves and their families.

Full rights were granted to the Jews. Their religion, their property, their say in politics, their laws (were not subject to Shariah), and the only condition is they don't behave unjustly.

Here's an example of Muhammad's kindness even to Jews:

عن قيس بن سعد إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَرَّتْ بِهِ جَنَازَةٌ فَقَامَ فَقِيلَ إِنَّهُ يَهُودِيٌّ فَقَالَ أَلَيْسَتْ نَفْسًا
Qays bin Sa'd reported that a funeral procession passed the messenger of Allah, and he stood up [out of respect], it was said to him: This is a Jew. The Messenger of Allah rebuked: Was he not a human being?

This post is getting length, so I will finish by saying the conflicts which arose between the Muslims and Jews was due to the fact there were many instigators from the Jews who conspired with the Quraysh to have the Muslims overthrown--famously Bani Qurayza, a Jewish tribe betrayed the Muslims and aided the attack against them during the battle of the trench a blatant violation of the treaty between the Muslims and Jews, how can one blame the Muslims for this?

Other examples are Ka'b ibn Ashraf, a Jew who despised the Muslims and went to Mecca to incite the Quraysh to attack the Muslims.

In short I challenge people who believe the nonsense outlined in the above video to find when the Muslims violated the rights of the Jews in Medina? I can post dozens of examples of their fair treatment and their rights being protected.

[Muwahid]

Wow that lady is a serious nutjob. She actually claimed Muhammad broke the treaty of Hudaybiyyah. Completely ignoring that the Quraysh attacked Bani Khuza'a thus breaking the peace between the two.. then Muhammad peacefully took Mecca.

Let's not also forget the Quraysh are the ones who tortured, killed, the pursued the much weaker Muslims all the way until the Muslims grew, then they wanted peace. So we're meant to sympathize with the pagans who tortured and killed innocent people?

[Danke]

[Danke]

...

[Muwahid]

...

Her opinion should be discredited simply after the first video, unless you would like to explain to me where I was wrong?

After looking her up it's clear she's a zionist neocon as well. Not the typical person I'd expect to see promoted on RPF.

[Danke]

[Danke]

[Danke]

....

[orafi]

Did Muhammad really consummate with a 9 year old girl?

Any allegations made about the Prophet Mohammad and Ayesha were only written down a few centuries after the Prophet's death.


Neither their marriage nor their "consummation" are mentioned in the Quran. Take that as you will.

[orafi]

@Danke

Do you believe that the Prophet Mohammad was immoral?

[Danke]

@Danke

Do you believe that the Prophet Mohammad was immoral?

If he ruled by the sword, decapitated non followers and was a mass murderer that some say, yes, Of course

[Ender]

If he ruled by the sword, decapitated non followers and was a mass murderer that some say, yes, Of course

Does that mean Moses was also immoral?

Numbers 31:7-18

They fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and killed every man. Among their victims were Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba - the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. They took all the plunder and spoils, including the people and animals, and brought the captives, spoils and plunder to Moses and Eleazar the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho.

Moses, Eleazar the priest and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp. Moses was angry with the officers of the army - the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds - who returned from the battle.

"Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."

[Danke]

Does that mean Moses was also immoral?

I don't know, is he?

[orafi]

If he ruled by the sword, decapitated non followers and was a mass murderer that some say, yes, Of course

I like the way you framed your answer.

When you speak of the people who say that and have said that, do you mean those who put weight into the Hadith?

The Hadith are a major component of mainstream and contemporary Islam of the many folks who call themselves Muslims.

The hadi the are also fabrications.


If you were to take the Hadith out of the picture and just had the Quran (which would be considered his perspective) , then, no, he did not rule by the sword nor murder anyone.

Nor did he wed a 6 year old

So him being immoral or amoral has zero basis.

[P3ter_Griffin]

....

http://www.islamicbulletin.org/free_...umal_quran.pdf

[wizardwatson]

Thanks.

I've certainly learned a lot from the non-Muslims on this board, and I hope any interfaith dialogue is used to enlighten rather than demonize. Christians can have their qualms with Islam in terms of our theological differences, such as us not believing Jesus is the literal son of God, or that he is also God incarnate.

However it helps no one to misinterpret Islam to serve their ideological purposes. There may be some confirmation bias in some Christians believing Islam is a barbaric war-like intolerant religion, that doesn't make it true (couldn't be further from the truth).

I reject Islam because of these theological qualms, not because Mohammed might have been immoral or Islamists like to make war. As others have pointed out the Hebrews of old were warlike in their hay day as well.

It isn't so much that Islam says "God has no son" which should be enough for a Christian to reject its teachings, but the reasons it gives.

Such was Jesus, the son of Mary. That is the whole truth, which they still doubt. God forbid that He Himself should beget a son! When He decrees a thing He need only say: ‘Be,’ and it is.
—Qur’an 19:35

Similar verses say the same thing on the subject. The pillar of the gospel just can't be true because God is all-powerful. He's self-sufficient. He's omnipotent and knows all things. It's beneath Him to beget.

So the Muslim man rejects Christ because he worships the God of power and might. All this truth, love, and grace just sounds like the religion of a whiney weakling to him I suppose. But the Son is the Zohar of God's glory. He is grace and truth and the work He has done is a work of love, a work of the Father.

The work on the cross is certainly offensive to a mind that worships God as powerful more than loving.

Anyway, at least they believe in all the same characters and the end times. This will all be sorted out.

[orafi]

I reject Islam because of these theological qualms, not because Mohammed might have been immoral or Islamists like to make war. As others have pointed out the Hebrews of old were warlike in their hay day as well.

It isn't so much that Islam says "God has no son" which should be enough for a Christian to reject its teachings, but the reasons it gives.

Such was Jesus, the son of Mary. That is the whole truth, which they still doubt. God forbid that He Himself should beget a son! When He decrees a thing He need only say: ‘Be,’ and it is.
—Qur’an 19:35

Similar verses say the same thing on the subject. The pillar of the gospel just can't be true because God is all-powerful. He's self-sufficient. He's omnipotent and knows all things. It's beneath Him to beget.

So the Muslim man rejects Christ because he worships the God of power and might. All this truth, love, and grace just sounds like the religion of a whiney weakling to him I suppose. But the Son is the Zohar of God's glory. He is grace and truth and the work He has done is a work of love, a work of the Father.

The work on the cross is certainly offensive to a mind that worships God as powerful more than loving.

Anyway, at least they believe in all the same characters and the end times. This will all be sorted out.

You are reaching.

It is recommended for a Muslim believer to mention g-d in every good thing he does or ask for forgiveness ask for forgiveness after every bad decision.

bismillāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm ("In the name of g-d, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful").


Not most "powerful". Although he is

[wizardwatson]

You are reaching.

It is recommended for a Muslim believer to mention g-d in every good thing he does or ask for forgiveness ask for forgiveness after every bad decision.

bismillāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm ("In the name of g-d, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful").


Not most "powerful". Although he is

You are missing my point. It wasn't that they don't mention he's merciful. It's that when they deny Christ they say it's because God is all-powerful and doesn't need to beget. I'm not saying Muslims don't acknowledge those other attributes of God, just saying they deny Christ based on attributes of power and loftiness.

It's telling.

The Jews do the same thing. Not singling out the Muslims.