Understanding Islam And Its Radicals

ConservativeTruth.org ^ | November 11, 2001 | Ana Barrett

[Luis Gonzalez]

I was completely numb as I watched the videos of the attack on September 11. As the attack was investigated and we learned that the perpetrators were Islamic terrorists, I could not shake the thought that something in their religion made these attacks seem legitimate in their eyes.

So I started, very cautiously, to look into what Islam stands for and what it considers important. I did not want to jump to conclusions. I wanted to know the truth. As a Christian and a serious student of the Bible, I am familiar with the bloody passages of the Old Testament. For this reason I proceeded with caution in my research. My goal was to discover the truth about Islam. My research did include some limited reading of the Qur'an (known in the West as the Koran), but it mainly consisted of reading and listening to people who were very knowledgeable of the religion.

First of all, in order to understand Muslims we need to know what they think of Allah, and we need to look at their worldview. We need to understand moderate Muslims, but we also need an understanding of the radical point of view.

Dr. Samuel Schlorff, an expert on Islam with Arab World Ministries, has written an excellent paper on the religion. He makes a scholarly comparison between Christianity and Islam. Much of the information used in this article regarding the history of Islam was drawn from this paper.

Here are some key points of Islamic theology:

1. Allah is Absolutely Transcendent
Allah is unlike anything that exists. This means that Allah is completely mysterious. Muslims believe that they can know the truth about him, but they can't have any knowledge of him as a person. He is a distant god who lets only his will be known.

2. Divine Guidance
Muslims believe the Qur'an offers guidance for living life and it is usually referred to as "a guidance and mercy for believers." (Sura 27:77) Their law (the Shari'ah) consists of the Qur'an as well as other materials.

3. Islam is from Heaven
The Qur'an describes its revelation as a "sending down" of material from a heavenly being. Because it came in the Arabic language, it is referred to as a heavenly language. From this idea stems the thought that an Islamic community is of heavenly origin. Dr. Nabil Jabur was interviewed recently on Moody radio. He is the author of the book The Rumbling Volcano, which deals with radical Islam. He states that the Qur'an is comprised of recitations given by Muhammad, which Muslims believe came from Allah for specific situations. Thus, when Muhammad was experiencing a tranquil period in his life, the tolerant recitations came forth. When he was having problems with three Jewish tribes, the militant recitations came forth. The Qur'an teaches both peace and war.
Some verses dealing with tolerance are:
Sura 2:5-6 - There is no compulsion in religion.
Sura 5:82 - The nearest in affection to the believer are those who say we are Christian.
Dr. Jabur stated. "When only one side of the Qur'an is presented alone, that is not the truth."

4. A Community in Submission
The Islamic view of the world is that man is inherently good. If man is depraved by society, then any government can create a perfect society by enforcing Islamic law. Muhammad was the head of state of Medina, which Muslims believe was a perfect society. This form of Islamic government is considered by Muslims to be an example of living in true submission to divine law. This degree of submission is greater than any that exists outside of Islam. For Muslims such a community represents the kingdom of Allah on earth. They believe the future of Islam is to dominate the whole House of War (which is how they refer to the entire non-Muslim world) until it is controlled by an Islamic state. The ultimate goal is that the entire world be under Islamic law.

What does the word Islam mean? We have been told, that Islam is related to the Arabic word meaning "peace." This is partially accurate, except that the word means a specific kind of peace. A more accurate translation is "surrender" or "submission." It describes the calm that exists when a vanquished soldier lays down his arms in submission. Dr. Schlorff states, "The truth is that there is another side to Islam, a side that embraces violence 'in the way of Allah.'"

Sura 2:216 - Fighting is prescribed for you.
Sura 2:190-192 - Fight in the cause of god, those who fight you enslave them. Fight them until there is no more persecution and oppression and there prevails justice and faith in god.
Sura 9:5 - Fight and enslave infidels.

During his interview Dr. Jabur was asked what the typical Muslim would think of Osama bin Laden. Would they approve or disapprove of what he is doing? He stated that it would be possible for religious Muslims to have either opinion. Some are embarrassed by what bin Laden is doing. Others think that grievances which have existed for years have come to a head in a justified violent retaliation.

Dr. Jabur tried to illuminate the meaning of a phrase which is used by Muslims and which has not been explained to us. Jihad does not mean holy war. Jihad means "striving for god." It comes in three degrees: 1) Striving against sin in one's own life; 2) The act of motivating others to do good; and 3) Using violent means to stop a wrong act is justifiable if necessary. This third degree is the one with which we are most familiar.

After Muhammad died in Medina he was succeeded by four caliphs who ruled in his place. (A caliph is "one who comes after.") The leadership of Muhammad's Islamic society was divided. Sunnis accept that all four were legitimate. Shi'ites believe that only one, Ali, was the rightful successor. The result has been a division within the Muslim world pertaining to Islamic law and spiritual authority. That is why we do not have a single Muslim leader to whom the world can appeal to stand up and lead the Muslims of the world away from bin Laden.

Shortly after the Attack, Chuck Colson brought up some very interesting points on his radio show, Breakpoint. He stated that due to the lack of widely recognized Islamic leadership, bin Laden is attempting to unify the radical Muslims living in moderate Muslim states. He would like nothing more than to have them overthrow those states so that he can unify them and install himself as the leader of one large radical Islamic nation, and wage war against the West. As evidence of this, he pointed out that bin Laden has not shown much interest in the Palestinians in the past. Now he is speaking out in their behalf in order to gain their support.

Of course most Muslims do not support such violence as terrorism. However watching a Muslim country being bombed day after day might change the minds of even the most moderate and cause them to support bin Laden. Perhaps that is the plan: Goad Muslims into hating the West so much that anything goes. The Qur'an supports both violence and peace. They may think that they can use violence now and then have peace on their own terms later

[browardchad]

In Islam the emphasis is supposed to be on submission to the will of God

Agreed, and there is also the elemental belief that all events -- even negative ones, are "the will of Allah." Strategic losses are not viewed as a failure of Islam, but as a failure in religious intensity.

I wonder how much these religious beliefs predispose Muslims to tolerating, even supporting, their own oppression?

[tlrugit]

Having said that, let's see what your evidence is for your statement that theocracies are more likely (than what) to abuse the people.

The fact that 70% of the world's refugees are Muslims fleeing Muslim reginmes might be one indicator.

[aruanan]

In our fallen state, we are inclined ONLY to evil -

Except that in our fallen state, we have never been wholly abandoned by G-d to the propensity toward total evil. He has been at work from the beginning in everybody, everywhere (well, unless you're a Calvinist, the Christian theological version of Islam) to provide both the consciousness of right and wrong as well as the will to try to follow the former and to eschew the latter. Some have responded with more alacrity than others to this universal grace than others.

[SarahW]

All have capacity for evil.

[Paul Ross]

Correct! Since the Muslims don't believe in Original Sin, they don't have the humble notion that salvation only comes from humility, seeking after a close and responsive walk after God, asking for his foregiveness. Looking for spiritual guidance on the daily basis. Not rote slavery to some distant law-giver. The Muslims thence have an extremely arrogant notion that man, being good, need only obey allah. And by their enforcing Islamic law, their perfect society, the Taliban's afghanistan, was realized. Which of course was Hell on Earth.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You are parsing the article just like radical Muslims parse the Quor'an, the author said much before, and much after that, and what was said before and after modifies your interpretation.

"...bin Laden is attempting to unify the radical Muslims living in moderate Muslim states. He would like nothing more than to have them overthrow those states so that he can unify them and install himself as the leader of one large radical Islamic nation, and wage war against the West. As evidence of this, he pointed out that bin Laden has not shown much interest in the Palestinians in the past. Now he is speaking out in their behalf in order to gain their support."

"Of course most Muslims do not support such violence as terrorism. However watching a Muslim country being bombed day after day might change the minds of even the most moderate and cause them to support bin Laden. Perhaps that is the plan: Goad Muslims into hating the West so much that anything goes."

The premise is that bin Laden is attacking us in order to goad us into retaliation, so that in turn, Muslims can be goaded into hating us.

[SauronOfMordor]

In what I have read of the Qur’an, it seems to me that the actions of fighting, killing, etc. are called for as a reaction to aggression, and it further instructs Muslims to quit fighting once the aggressors have ceased fighting them,

Many Islamists have a Clintonesque definition of "aggression". To many Islamists, any resistence to Islamization is "aggression". To many Islamists, any retaliation against a Muslim is aggression. So a Muslim may commit any act against an infidel, but if the infidel responds, the the Muslim may cry "aggression!"

[Ga Rob]

Right, man is inherently evil...we must fight everyday to be "good".

[steve-b]

The question is whether they opposed it on religious grounds "fight the invaders", because they supported terrorism, or whether they opposed the idea of America and other western powers conducting what they (and some of us) see as nation building by the US, and in accordance to western needs.

IMO, it boils down to the fact that the Western rebuilding of Afghanistan is a particularly painful display of the contrast between our successful civilization and their failed one.

[ggekko]

This article is misguided because it looks for a deep theological explanation for Bin Laden. A more compelling explanation is found in recent history.

All of the Governments in the Arabian peninisula are infected to a greater or lesser degree with a form of Islamo-Facism. This poisonous ideology was invented by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in the period between WWI and WWII. This ideology combines elements of National Socialism with Pan Arbaic ideas.

The grip of Islamo-Facism is strongest in those Islamic countries with significant oil revenues. This dynamic is seen very clearly in the case of Iraq. Iraq is an old adminsitrative area of the Ottoman Empire. After the collapse of the Ottomans the British set up Iraq as a country basically to guard the Mosul and Kirkuk oil fields. Iraq as a country had no other rationale other than guarding two oil fields.

After the British left the Middle East in the 1960s Saddam emerged as the most ruthless strongman in Iraq. Since oil was Iraq's only viable export national power became synonymous with controlling the flow of oil. Once Saddam had attained control of the oil he began setting up a society along Facist lines since he needed no popular sanction as long as he controlled the oil. Saddam's terror apparatus and militarization if Iraq insure that Iraq is ideally suited for repression at home and agression abroad. To a large extent Iran and Syria are organized along similar lines.

It is clear to see that along as Islamo-Facism and Pan Arabism are the dominant ideas in the Arab world there can be no peace. Bin Laden is a largely a foonote to the Pan Arabic movement in the Arba peninsula.

The transformation of Iraq from Islamo-Facism into something more benign will be the most potent answer to Bin Laden-ism. Not only will Bin Laden be deprived of basing areas but the idea that Arabs must unite into a single state in Arabia in order to prosper will have been belied.

[watchin]

"Of course most Muslims do not support such violence as terrorism. However watching a Muslim country being bombed day after day might change the minds of even the most moderate and cause them to support bin Laden. Perhaps that is the plan: Goad Muslims into hating the West so much that anything goes"

That's not balanced. That's pure islamic spin. It might be accurate to state that "many" do not support violence, but "most"? Whether one looks at history or current events, around the globe, where there is islam there is violence.

When the planes struck on 911, most of us assumed it was the work of muslims. We were right. When there's terrorism, there's almost always a muslim behind it. Sure, you can think of a few exceptions (Oklahoma City, Northern Ireland) but let's face it, those are only the exceptions.

But stating that the goal of this war is to turn the muslim world against us? That's over the top. It's anti-American. It's slanderous and it's stupid.

Look at the number of muslims in (mostly Christian) America. They are free to worship, and their mosques are respected. The rare exceptions come when their fellow worshippers slaughter thousands of innocent American citizens. Even then, the "persecution" comes in the forms of mistrust-by-association and graffiti.

Compare this treatment of muslims in the Christian world to the treatment of Christians in the muslim world. While muslims whine about oppression and free speech, Christians are sold into slavery, tortured, driven from muslim lands, forbidden to share their faith or worship openly (under penalty of death), and threatened with extermination through jihad - (a word whose definition is best ascertained by watching their deeds rather that listening to their words).

They don't need any goading. They need a swift boot in the butt to let them know who not to mess with.

[watchin]

Respect through intimidation bump.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"This article is misguided because it looks for a deep theological explanation for Bin Laden."

Not at all, it paints bin Laden as an opportunist, using religion to gain power.

[SauronOfMordor]

All have capacity for evil.

Agreed. I have had times when my greatest wish was to put a meat cleaver thru the forehead of certain people. But I chose not to act upon that desire.

Yes, all have the capacity for evil, all have varying degrees of inclination towards evil. This big thing is how well do we CONTROL those impulses and inclinations. Some people control their evil, others are controlled BY their evil. It all comes down to what we choose to do.

[watchin]

Funny how things boil down to just two worldviews, huh?

Great post.

[watchin]

If one looks really hard, one can actually see a difference between your description and people who blow themselves up on crowded buses.

[SauronOfMordor]

The premise is that bin Laden is attacking us in order to goad us into retaliation, so that in turn, Muslims can be goaded into hating us.

This is the pattern of Muslim/non-Muslim conflict throughout the world and throughout history.

Central to the Muslim mindset is that no retaliation by a non-Muslim against a Muslim can ever be justified. So all it takes is for one Muslim to get the ball rolling, and the conflict will feed upon itself.

There will be no peace until Islam conquers, or is itself eliminated

[watchin]

If man is inherently good, how can he be depraved by society that is made up of "inherently good" people?

Perfect. I've tried to make the same point before, but never so consisely.

[swarthyguy]

I'm sick of trying to understand them. Why bother? We know what they think. Enough of this navel gazing over analysing crap. Why do WE have to understand them? They don't make a similar effort. All they do is whine and bitch and have pointy headed useless academica analyses like this which do absolutely nothing.

Look at the populations of the socalled allies of America; Saudi, Egypt, Pakistan, even Turkey. There's no love there for the US. Yet the US keeps kissing their butts.

[watchin]

Muslim Logic - moose-limb lah-jik n.

1. See oxymoron; illogical

2. To many Islamists, any resistence to Islamization is "aggression". To many Islamists, any retaliation against a Muslim is aggression. So a Muslim may commit any act against an infidel, but if the infidel responds, the the Muslim may cry "aggression!"
See also: Palestinian rationalization