Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Critical Look at the Koran
Crisis Magazine ^ | May 27, 2014 | William Kilpatrick

Posted on 05/27/2014 12:48:53 PM PDT by NYer

shutterstock_image of Koran

“May Allah accept this from me.”

“I’m doing it in the name of Allah.”

“To establish Islamic law—Allah’s law on earth.”

The above are statements made by would-be and successful jihadists to explain their motivations for planning or executing acts of terror in America. Jihadists in other parts of the world say much the same thing. Where, then, do they get the idea that this is what Allah wants them to do?

Jihadists usually cite the Koran as the source of their motivation. For example, Terry Lee Loewen explained his planned jihad attack on Wichita’s Mid-Continent Airport last December as follows:

I don’t understand how you can read the Qur’an and the sunnah of the Prophet and not understand that jihad and the implementation of Sharia is absolutely demanded of all the Muslim Ummah.

So how can we disabuse terrorists and potential terrorists of the notion that Allah wants them to kill infidels? The obvious place to start is with the Koran. We can’t say, however, that there is absolutely no warrant in the Koran for killing unbelievers, because there patently is. “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them” (9:5) is typical of many similar verses. According to a content analysis conducted by the Center for the Study of Political Islam, 24 percent of the Medinan verses of the Koran are devoted to jihad. Or, as Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud once declared, “Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad.”

The you-should-read-the-Koran tactic won’t work with those who actually have read the Koran. What else might work? Another tactic is to try and convince would-be jihadists that they are misinterpreting the Koran—that it should be interpreted in a more spiritual and peaceful way. But here again we run into a problem. Since the eleventh century, a consensus has existed among Islamic scholars that the “Gates of Ijtihad” (or interpretation) are closed. Calling for new interpretations is tantamount to rejecting centuries of Islamic tradition.

Some small sects, such as the Ahmadiyya community, do interpret the Koran in a symbolic rather than literal way, but they are considered as heretics by mainstream Muslims and they are often the target of persecution. More importantly, Muhammad, whose example is considered definitive by Muslim authorities, did not interpret the command to wage jihad in a figurative way and his victims did not die figurative deaths. The Center for the Study of Political Islam’s content analysis of the Sira (Muhammad’s biography) shows that approximately two-thirds of it has to do with fighting. Part Three, which covers the Medinan period of Muhammad’s life, is particularly instructive in this respect. Its five hundred pages are taken up almost entirely with descriptions of battles and raids.

In short, the jihadist interpretation of the Koran is strongly supported both by the text and by the example of Muhammad. Why should they give it up when they have so much evidence on their side? Jihadists have been highly successful in recruiting Muslims to the cause precisely because they can demonstrate that warfare against unbelievers is a scriptural duty.

Trying to convince current and potential jihadists that the Koran should be interpreted in a peaceful way is an uphill jihad. Is there another way of addressing the issue? Well, yes, there is. Moreover, to paraphrase the ubiquitous ad copy, this one weird trick can save you hundreds of fruitless arguments. The other—largely untried—alternative for disabusing jihadists of jihadist notions is to discredit the Koran entirely. If the whole thing is a man-made fabrication, what does it matter what verse such-and-such says? If Muhammad made it all up, why waste your time in weighing the peaceful suras against the violent ones?

This argument is not often made because if you make it you will be attacked not only by Muslims but by non-Muslims as well. The latter will go after you with charges of divisiveness, insensitivity, bigotry, hatred, and whatnot. That, however, doesn’t diminish the strength of the argument. The Islamic edifice rests on the belief that God wrote the Koran and transmitted it via the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad, who merely recited it to his followers. If that’s not true, then only a fool would rush into battle for the sake of Allah and the promised paradise. Take away the divine mandate to subjugate unbelievers, and you take away the rationale for Islam’s war against the world.

Although it’s difficult to get a hearing for it, the argument itself is surprisingly easy to make. That’s because Muslim apologists have set themselves up for a takedown by establishing an impossibly high standard of evidence. What proof is there that God wrote the Koran? Well, there’s the circular argument, i.e., we know that God wrote the Koran because that’s what the Koran says and we know the Koran is truthful because God wrote it. For many Muslims, that settles the matter. However, Islamic scholars long ago realized that something more was needed. And the main argument they developed is that the Koran is such a piece of perfect, nonpareil prose that no one except God could have written it. As I say, it’s a hard case to make because although there are some arresting passages in the Koran, there are also plenty like this:

Prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave-girls whom God has given you as booty; the daughters of your paternal and maternal uncles and of your paternal and maternal aunts who fled with you; and any believing woman who gives herself to the Prophet and whom the Prophet wishes to take in marriage. (33:50)

Maybe it sounds better in Arabic, but one suspects that, however translated, this piece of legalese is still going to read like a passage from a textbook on contract law. Christians and Jews should be able to sympathize with the plight of the Muslim apologist. How would you like to be stuck with the task of defending those so-and-so-begat-so-and-so passages in the Bible as examples of incomparable style?

Furthermore, the literary shortcomings of the Koran are not limited to pedestrian prose. The author, whoever he was, also had little sense of composition, continuity, character, dialogue, or drama. Don’t take my word for it. Here are some scholarly observations:

His characters are all alike, and they utter the same platitudes. He is fond of dramatic dialogue, but has very little sense of dramatic scene or action. The logical connections between successive episodes is often loose, sometimes wanting; and points of importance, necessary for the clear understanding of the story, are likely to be left out. (C.C. Torrey, The Jewish Foundation of Islam, New York, 1933, p. 108)

The book aesthetically considered is by no means a first-rate performance…indispensable links, both in expression and in the sequence of events, are often omitted…and nowhere do we find a steady advance in the narration…and even the syntax betrays great awkwardness…. (Theodor Noldeke in Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., Vol. 15, pp. 898-906)

The Koran is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content…. (P. Crone and M. Cook, Hagarism: The Making of the Muslim World, Cambridge, 1977, p. 9)

As I wrote two years ago:

If you believe that the Koran is dictated by God, you are faced with the difficulty of explaining why the Author of Creation seems to lack the literary touch—that is, the knack for storytelling, sequence, composition, and drama that we expect in accomplished human authors. Yes, there are beautiful passages in the Koran, but as an exercise in composition, it would not pass muster in most freshmen writing courses.

The purely human origin of the Koran is further suggested by the very human defensiveness displayed by its author. He never tires of reminding his audience that the Koran is a genuine revelation, not a fake one. This obsessive concern with the Koran’s authenticity is exhibited on almost every page. Here is a small sampling:

This Koran could not have been devised by any but God. (10:37)

This is no invented tale, but a confirmation of previous scriptures…. (12:112)

This Book is beyond all doubt revealed by the Lord of the Universe… Do they say: “He has invented it himself”? (32:1-2)

When our clear revelations are recited to them they say… “this is nothing but an invented falsehood.” (34:43)

As I say, these assertions about the authenticity of the revelation appear over and over. Far more space is allotted to vouching for the genuine nature of the revelation than to telling what the revelation is. But what sort of author feels compelled to tell us ad nauseum that his word is not a human invention? It’s not likely that the Author of all Creation would be so insecure about what he had written. On the other hand, a man who had invented it all himself would have good reason to be defensive. Muhammad, however, also realized that the best defense is a good offense. Thus, as the Koran repeatedly reminds its readers, the surest path to hell is to doubt “Our revelations.”

In insisting that the Koran is the verbatim word of God, Muslims are stuck with the task of defending a second-rate literary production as though it were Shakespeare, Homer, and Dante all rolled into one. If they have been largely successful in so defending it, it is because not many want to challenge them on the point. Of course, some of this reluctance is due to the fear factor. For instance, scripture scholar Bart Ehrmans, who has been outspoken in his criticism of Christianity, has admitted that he wouldn’t apply his skills to the Koran because he values his life too highly.

But even in the days before academicians became aware that a slip of the tongue might result in a shortened life span, scholars of Islam, particularly Christian scholars, were often reluctant to criticize Islam. Islam, after all, was an Abrahamic faith, and it would be bad manners to question the foundations of a fellow religion. Thus, Christian scholars of Islam such as Montgomery Watt (1909-2006) and Louis Massignon (1883-1962) tended to put the best possible face on Islam while minimizing its faults.

Some, like the atheist Muslim apostate Ibn Warraq, have attributed this uncritical attitude to a fear that the kind of critical analysis that would prove fatal to Islam would also inflict a death blow to Christianity. According to Warraq, “They recognized that Islam was a sister religion, heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian ideas; and Christianity and Islam stood or fell together.”

There is probably some truth to this. One does sometimes detect a “We religions have to stick together” mentality among professional dialoguers. However, at this point, this attitude probably has more to do with twenty-first century concerns over sensitivity than with fears that if you start digging around the foundations of Islam, the whole Christian structure will come tumbling down too. Though Christianity has been hurt by various modernist assaults, it has withstood the critical-historical investigation in admirable fashion. In fact, it has successfully used the tools of textual analysis and historical evidence to its own advantage.

Islam would not fare so well in the face of a similar examination. Which once again brings up the question: why not subject it to the same rigorous standards? Dialoguers and scholars currently spend a lot of time ferreting out little nuggets of compatibility between the Koran and the Bible. But what’s the point of establishing the common ground between a real revelation and a fake one? There are many commonalities between the Book of Mormon and the Bible as well, but Catholic scholars don’t show much interest in trying to reconcile the two books—and wisely so.

If Islam weren’t such a militant faith, it would probably be best to take an attitude of live and let live. Unfortunately, live and let live is not what the Koran is all about. Although a great many Muslims manage to ignore its harsher mandates, the violent injunctions are still there and they beckon to those who seek to devote themselves fully to Allah’s commands.

Consequently, it’s not just Islamic terrorists that need to be feared, but also Islamic theorists and theologians. They provide the ideological fuel which powers the terror machine. It’s important to take out the terrorist, but in the long run, it’s more important to take down the terrorist’s ideology. And that, by necessity, involves a deconstruction of the Koran. If that measure seems much too drastic, consider the alternatives—a slow-motion capitulation such as is now happening in Europe or a bloody war, once it finally dawns on the civilized world that it must resist.

Up to now, Islam’s status as a religion has provided it with a sort of diplomatic immunity under which it has literally gotten away with murder. Thomas Jefferson said “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” But when your neighbor’s religion tells him it’s okay to break your neck and enslave your children, it might be prudent to expose that religion and its holy book to the light of serious examination.

All of this leaves aside the tricky question of who should bell the cat. Whose job is it to say that the Koran has “100 percent man-made material” written all over it? That question requires an essay all to itself, but one observation seems in order here: it should most probably not be the pope or any other prominent churchman for the obvious reason that authoritative Church statements are the most likely to invite retaliation against Christians living in Muslim lands. This is a job for lay men and women provided they have the requisite skills, and for secular critics and scholars as well as Christian ones. The more, the better.

Bart Ehrmans has excused himself from the task of applying his scholarship to the Koran on the grounds that he values his life. That seems like the soul of pragmatism, but it’s a very short-sighted kind of pragmatism. The larger question is not whether he values his own life, but whether he values the lives of his children and the future of his society. If the Koran remains unchallenged, the jihad will continue to spread, and there will come a day when we will wish we had contested the Koran while we still had the freedom to do so.

(Photo credit: Courtesy of Shutterstock.)



TOPICS: History; Islam; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: bartehrman; ehrmans; fabrication; islam; jihad; koran; quran; rop; sharia; shariah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 05/27/2014 12:48:53 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; GregB; Berlin_Freeper; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; Ronaldus Magnus; tiki; ...
The following article was posted several years ago and provides keen insight into the original source language of the Koran. Consider that christian missionaries, who spoke Syro-Aramaic, brought the good news to the desert people.

"Beginning in the third century, the Syrian Christians did not limit themselves to bringing their evangelical mission to nearby countries, like Armenia or Persia. They pressed on toward distant territories, all the way to the borders of China and the western coast of India, in addition to the entire Arabian peninsula all the way to Yemen and Ethiopia. It is thus rather probable that, in order to proclaim the Christian message to the Arabic peoples, they would have used (among others) the language of the Bedouins, or Arabic. In order to spread the Gospel, they necessarily made use of a mishmash of languages. But in an era in which Arabic was just an assembly of dialects and had no written form, the missionaries had no choice but to resort to their own literary language and their own culture; that is, to Syro-Aramaic. The result was that the language of the Koran was born as a written Arabic language, but one of Arab-Aramaic derivation."

The Virgins and the Grapes: the Christian Origins of the Koran

2 posted on 05/27/2014 12:49:24 PM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Jihadists usually cite the Koran as the source of their motivation.

It is all there. They are just following their Holy Books:

The Koran:

Sura (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution of Muslims is worse than slaughter of non-believers...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah."

Sura (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."

Sura (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Sura (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Sura (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Sura (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah"

Sura (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Sura (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."

Sura (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Sura (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Sura (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

Sura (47:4) - "So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make them prisoners,"

Sura (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way"

Sura (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end

From the Hadith:

Muslim (1:33) - 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

Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’”

Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power."

Ibn Ishaq: 327 - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

Ibn Ishaq: 992 - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah."

Robert Spencer does a good job here explaining Islam - Blogging the Qur’an

3 posted on 05/27/2014 12:59:56 PM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Is the Virgin/Grapes book now available in English?


4 posted on 05/27/2014 1:03:12 PM PDT by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Confirms that the God of the Holy Bible is not the same god of the koran.


5 posted on 05/27/2014 1:08:06 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive

I go to the Jihadwatch site often.


6 posted on 05/27/2014 1:08:54 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

The more you know about Islam, the more you see the truth in my tagline.


7 posted on 05/27/2014 1:10:57 PM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive

Yes.

Got to remember that Satan can make himself to become an “angel of light” which means he can deceive people.


8 posted on 05/27/2014 1:15:15 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive

Even I do believe Mohammed wrote all the stuff up and it does not have anything divine inspired.


9 posted on 05/27/2014 1:22:00 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Some, like the atheist Muslim apostate Ibn Warraq, have attributed this uncritical attitude to a fear that the kind of critical analysis that would prove fatal to Islam would also inflict a death blow to Christianity. According to Warraq, “They recognized that Islam was a sister religion, heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian ideas; and Christianity and Islam stood or fell together.”

Patently false! islam and it's book are the flip side, mirror image of Christianity and Judaism. All a Christian has to do is compare the islamic image of Isa (Jesus)presented in the koran to the real, divine image presented in the Gospels.

To wit:
-isa is merely a prophet, the greatest prophet to his time but subservient to mohammed.
-Isa was never crucified.
-Isa is not divine.
-Isa never rose from the dead.
-Isa will come again at the end of the world to judge the Christians and the Jews. He will offer them a final chance to renounce their 'blashemic' views and then lead the Mahdi's armies in a war of conquest and slaughter to kill all Christians and Jews who refuse to convert to islam.
-When Isa comes again he will be the Mahdi's First Lieutenant.

How can pointing out the false teachings regarding our Lord and Saviour possibly harm Christianity??? I feel it's my duty as a Christian to point these lies out at every turn.

I am a Christian.
Jesus Christ died for my sins.
He rose from the dead, conquering death and opening for me the reality of eternal life.
Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour.

10 posted on 05/27/2014 1:22:07 PM PDT by pgkdan (ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF THE ANTICHRIST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Whose job is it to say that the Koran has “100 percent man-made material” written all over it? That question requires an essay all to itself, but one observation seems in order here: it should most probably not be the pope or any other prominent churchman for the obvious reason that authoritative Church statements are the most likely to invite retaliation against Christians living in Muslim lands.

That retaliation is already happening all over the islamic world. Crucufixions in Syria, weekly beheadings in Saudi Arabia, mass murder of Christians in Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan. And the Church remains silent. And our Pope hugs and kisses these vile barbaric savages and calls them his brothers and sisters!!!

11 posted on 05/27/2014 1:25:11 PM PDT by pgkdan (ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF THE ANTICHRIST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
Even I do believe Mohammed wrote all the stuff up and it does not have anything divine inspired.

I don't understand how people can believe in Islam or Mormonism. Both made up religions.

12 posted on 05/27/2014 1:26:06 PM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: chajin
Is the Virgin/Grapes book now available in English?

Don't know but, given the fact the author had to use a pseudonym, I doubt it. Read the article, though. It makes absolute sense. I am Roman Catholic but I practice my faith in the Maronite (Eastern) Catholic Church which traces its liturgy back to Antioch where Peter served as bishop before proceeding to Rome. The liturgical language is Syro-Aramaic!

13 posted on 05/27/2014 1:29:16 PM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The "Koran" isn't fit to be toilet paper, and is one of the most VILE documents on the face of the Earth.

What did your Heavenly Father tell you about going after other gods?

Remember our Heavenly Father telling us HOW to handle other religions,
how to show the proper reaction to their false gods.
If you want a detailed history of "Mohammed's History" (spelled variously; Mahomet, Muhammed, Mehmet, etc.) then watch William Federer explain it, from Jan. 25, 2012 at CC Chino Hills, CA. It's a MUST WATCH for everyone,Christians, Athiests and even Muslims!

This Video exposes the "Hidden Truths" and "Goals" behind Radical Islamic Muslims! - (EVEN WORSE);
It's one hour, thirty-two minuites and 26 seconds long, but it's worth your time.
Watch and learn Mohammed's History - Exposing Islam's "Hidden Truths" - Of Radical Muslims.

Also read ISLAM--Religion of Peace?

Click here to view Books by WILLIAM FEDERER from Amazon.com.
14 posted on 05/27/2014 1:33:10 PM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive

By its fruits you will know the tree. Islam murders more innocent people all over the world than any other force alive today. Satan’s chief agent today on Rock Three.


15 posted on 05/27/2014 1:33:53 PM PDT by faithhopecharity ((Brilliant, Profound Tag Line Goes Here, just as soon as I can think of one..))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

bkmk


16 posted on 05/27/2014 1:39:02 PM PDT by Sergio (An object at rest cannot be stopped! - The Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chajin
#4. Is the Virgin/Grapes book now available in English? - chajin
17 posted on 05/27/2014 1:49:17 PM PDT by wtd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive; Biggirl

Of course the biggest problem is this: Since the eleventh century, a consensus has existed among Islamic scholars that the “Gates of Ijtihad” (or interpretation) are closed. Calling for new interpretations is tantamount to rejecting centuries of Islamic tradition. Appealing to reason also fails as Islam rejects that, as well.


18 posted on 05/27/2014 1:50:15 PM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer; daniel1212; Gamecock; boatbums; metmom; BlueDragon
A good article on a critical view of the Koran. Which leads me to wonder why the modern Popes and others in the Roman Catholic church continue to placate the Muslims.

From EWTN:

In the Koran, the holy name of the Blessed Virgin Mary is mentioned no less than thirty times. No other woman's name is even mentioned, not even that of Mohammed's daughter, Fatima. Among men, only Abraham, Moses, and Noah are mentioned more times than Our Lady. In the Koran, Our Blessed Mother is described as "Virgin, ever Virgin." The Islamic belief in the virginity of Mary puts to shame the heretical beliefs of those who call themselves Christian, while denying the perpetual virginity of Mary. Make no mistake about it, there is a very special relationship between the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Moslems!(OUR LADY AND ISLAM: HEAVEN’S PEACE PLAN Fr Ladis J. Cizik, Blue Army National Executive Director)

OUR LADY AND ISLAM: HEAVEN’S PEACE PLAN

19 posted on 05/27/2014 2:09:44 PM PDT by redleghunter (But let your word 'yes be 'yes,' and your 'no be 'no.' Anything more than this is from the evil one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

EWTN is Modernist Central.


20 posted on 05/27/2014 2:11:02 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan
How can pointing out the false teachings regarding our Lord and Saviour possibly harm Christianity??? I feel it's my duty as a Christian to point these lies out at every turn.

You did a very good job of summarizing the crux issues with Islam. Besides all the other satanic stuff they spout.

21 posted on 05/27/2014 2:14:24 PM PDT by redleghunter (But let your word 'yes be 'yes,' and your 'no be 'no.' Anything more than this is from the evil one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Of course the biggest problem is this: Since the eleventh century, a consensus has existed among Islamic scholars that the “Gates of Ijtihad” (or interpretation) are closed. Calling for new interpretations is tantamount to rejecting centuries of Islamic tradition. Appealing to reason also fails as Islam rejects that, as well.

There seems to be a lot of that going on.

22 posted on 05/27/2014 2:20:01 PM PDT by redleghunter (But let your word 'yes be 'yes,' and your 'no be 'no.' Anything more than this is from the evil one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: piusv
EWTN is Modernist Central.

Ensure you don't email that to Mother Angelica who is enjoying retirement.

23 posted on 05/27/2014 2:21:18 PM PDT by redleghunter (But let your word 'yes be 'yes,' and your 'no be 'no.' Anything more than this is from the evil one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

“I am a Christian.
Jesus Christ died for my sins.
He rose from the dead, conquering death and opening for me the reality of eternal life.
Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour. “

BINGO! We have a winner!


24 posted on 05/27/2014 2:21:57 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: piusv

Um.............Not really.


25 posted on 05/27/2014 2:22:29 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

Yes, ever since Mother Angelica left. But I’m not surprised that you disagree.


26 posted on 05/27/2014 2:25:24 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

It became Modernist when she gave up control. I don’t fault her because it was a tough decision on her part, but things changed when she “left”.


27 posted on 05/27/2014 2:26:40 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: piusv

http://www.amazon.com/EWTN-A-Network-Gone-Wrong/dp/0966304675


28 posted on 05/27/2014 2:28:42 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: NYer

RE: appealing to reason fails, as Muslims reject that as well

Nevertheless, the true God is the Logos; reason itself. Somewhere in the fog of their minds, God is there, after all. Christians must assail the Gates of Hell with reason and logic, as well as with Love. Why are we not questioning the illogic of violence against God’s people? If they had truth, why does it set them against one another? Why husbands beating their wives and an epidemic of raping and honor killing and ethnic violence on and on? How can they suggest a worldwide totalitarian rule of Islam would bring peace, when in fact, they fight one another constantly?


29 posted on 05/27/2014 2:37:18 PM PDT by Missouri gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Missouri gal

It is a sign that the teachings in question do not come from God, but from the enemy, Satan, the devil.


30 posted on 05/27/2014 2:40:06 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: piusv

Yet, if my memory is correct, EWTN has presented TLM in its lineup as much as possible.


31 posted on 05/27/2014 2:41:18 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Missouri gal
Why are we not questioning the illogic of violence against God’s people? If they had truth, why does it set them against one another? Why husbands beating their wives and an epidemic of raping and honor killing and ethnic violence on and on? How can they suggest a worldwide totalitarian rule of Islam would bring peace, when in fact, they fight one another constantly?

In all fairness, the Muslims probably question how a Christian West would allow the wholesale slaughter of innocent unborn babies. Yet I see your point. The murdering of babies is not in our Christian beliefs but all the stuff you listed is surely 'justified' by Muslims as in their's.

32 posted on 05/27/2014 2:47:21 PM PDT by redleghunter (But let your word 'yes be 'yes,' and your 'no be 'no.' Anything more than this is from the evil one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

The Koran is to Islam what Mein Kampf was to Nazism.


33 posted on 05/27/2014 3:29:21 PM PDT by jmacusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

Ditto.


34 posted on 05/27/2014 3:31:01 PM PDT by jmacusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

You got it.


35 posted on 05/27/2014 3:31:38 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

bones


36 posted on 05/27/2014 4:12:35 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: piusv

I consider EWTN to be a very conservative Catholic Cable tv network when you think of it and very faithful.

You are fogiven of that false accusation.


37 posted on 05/27/2014 4:20:10 PM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive

The contents of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ is but a children’s book when compared to the Koran, yet the former is much maligned, as it should be, while the latter is called a holy book.

The nation is forewarned of the ominous moral values that Muslims adhere to, but our political ‘leaders’ continue to grant these beliefs protection under the First Amendment.

Should something catastrophic happen to this country, as a result of Koranic teachings, our elected officials must assume all responsibility for not acting prudently.


38 posted on 05/27/2014 4:24:46 PM PDT by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

I don’t need your forgiveness.


39 posted on 05/27/2014 4:28:44 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JDoutrider

for later review...


40 posted on 05/27/2014 4:33:28 PM PDT by JDoutrider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

So many people of all faiths mistakenly believe that Mohammed actually wrote the Koran. He did not. It was written by two or three different people relying on hearsay a very long time after he died. I used to know who they were, but old age is taking a lot of my memory and I’m too lazy to look it up.


41 posted on 05/27/2014 5:09:51 PM PDT by WVNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl; NYer

I agree, the ‘allah’ of the Koran cannot be the God our Father and the Father of Jesus.


42 posted on 05/27/2014 5:23:14 PM PDT by GreyFriar (Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer
There have ALWAYS been conquerors who have used religion/faith as a tool. Nothing has changed.

As A. Lincoln said, human behavior can be modified to some extent but human nature cannot be changed.

43 posted on 05/27/2014 7:57:38 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GreyFriar
I agree, the ‘allah’ of the Koran cannot be the God our Father and the Father of Jesus.

Totally true.

*Allah is alone, no trinity.

*Allah is not a "father" image, nor is he loving at all. He is merciful and compassionate but not loving.

*Also, we are God's beloved children and we consider Him our Father. That doesn't exist in Islam.

*Islam means "surrender" to Allah. There is none of that in Christianity...just LOVE.

*God IS love.
Allah is not.

God and Allah are as different as two deities can be.

44 posted on 05/27/2014 8:01:48 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter
Thanks. Quite a contrast .
45 posted on 05/27/2014 8:47:31 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Thanks for posting a thread we can ALL agree on. ☺
46 posted on 05/27/2014 10:46:50 PM PDT by boatbums (Proud member of the Free Republic Bible Thumpers Brigade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WVNan; redleghunter
So many people of all faiths mistakenly believe that Mohammed actually wrote the Koran. He did not. It was written by two or three different people relying on hearsay a very long time after he died. I used to know who they were, but old age is taking a lot of my memory and I’m too lazy to look it up.

And, at a much later date, the head imam/sheik gathered together all the copies that were made and destroyed all that did not match precisely word for word. That is how the Koran - which Muslims actually BRAG about - is shown to be an "uncorrupted" scripture. Unlike the Bible, of which there are minor variants attributed to scribal error or translation problems - which, in truth, PROVES its reliability - Koran promoters contend that their book is without any errors or mistakes. I guess that is easy enough to do if you could burn every Bible manuscript ever found and keep a single version by which all other copies are made.

47 posted on 05/27/2014 10:59:42 PM PDT by boatbums (Proud member of the Free Republic Bible Thumpers Brigade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: GreyFriar; Biggirl

But Vatican II Catholics agree with the Vatican II teaching that Catholics and Muslims worship the same God.


48 posted on 05/28/2014 2:25:27 AM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: piusv

It is NOT the same God, sorry.


49 posted on 05/28/2014 3:21:40 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Yet, to this very day the Holy Bible is regarded as the #1 best selling book of all time.


50 posted on 05/28/2014 3:23:43 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson