Logical fallacies in the Quran

 (post reproduced from Why Quran is logically fallacious)

What follows is a list of fallacies and their examples taken directly from the Quran (Sahih Translation). This shows why Quran as a source of knowledge is extremely flawed. I went with the approach of going fallacy by fallacy instead of verse by verse because otherwise this post would be me quoting every other verse and saying appeal to emotion fallacy.

Genetic Fallacy - At many places in the Quran such as the following, it makes arguments that one should remain the way they were born. Now this commits many more fallacies then one but the one that I have noted is the most interesting one.

when your Lord took from the children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants and made them testify of themselves, [saying to them], "Am I not your Lord?" They said, "Yes, we have testified." [This] - lest you should say on the Day of Resurrection, "Indeed, we were of this unaware." (Quran 7:172)

Special Pleading - Well Allah in Quran on many occasions says that things just couldn’t have been different without providing a sufficient, or any explanation at all. One such case is the verse that follows.

Had there been within the heavens and earth gods besides Allah, they both would have been ruined. So exalted is Allah, Lord of the Throne, above what they describe. (Quran 21:22)

Post hoc ergo propter - Quran in the following verse asserts that when people pray to him on a boat and return home safely, they were saved because of their prayer. Now this commits more than just one fallacy but the most prominent one that this commits is the “Post hoc ergo propter” fallacy since, it asserts that two things happen after each other therefore the former was the cause of the latter.

And when they board a ship, they supplicate Allah, sincere to Him in religion. But when He delivers them to the land, at once they associate others with Him(Quran 29:65)

Cherrypicking - We don’t exclusively see cherrypicking from Muslims since the Quran itself commits the fallacy of suppressing evidence. It shows us a case of men crying for his help and getting it but later turning away from him which in and of itself is a fine example but the verse’s implicit conclusion is that men turn to him in hard times. That doesn’t follow because the argument ignores the times when men asked Allah and he decided not to intervene, or when men didn’t ask Allah but their bad times were dealt with anyways. Indeed Allah is the greatest of the cherrypickers.

And when adversity touches man, he calls upon his Lord, turning to Him [alone]; then when He bestows on him a favor from Himself, he forgets Him whom he called upon before, and he attributes to Allah equals to mislead [people] from His way. Say, "Enjoy your disbelief for a little; indeed, you are of the companions of the Fire." (Quran 39:8)

Is-Ought fallacy - Quran argues in the following verse, that if something is natural among humans then it should be kept the way it is. Now this commits multiple fallacies but the most outrageous one being that its breakage of Hume’s law.

So direct your face toward the religion, inclining to truth. [Adhere to] the fitrah of Allah upon which He has created [all] people. No change should there be in the creation of Allah. That is the correct religion, but most people do not know. (Quran 30:8)

Omnipotence doesn’t matter, you can’t beat David Hume.

Non-sequitur:

In the following verse, the Quran states that even if all plants watered with the same water, some would produce tastier food then others and somehow concludes that it’s, therefore, a sign from God. The conclusion just doesn’t follow...

And within the land are neighboring plots and gardens of grapevines and crops and palm trees, [growing] several from a root or otherwise, watered with one water; but We make some of them exceed others in [quality of] fruit. Indeed in that are signs for a people who reason. (Quran 13:4)

Here the Quran concludes that Jesus couldn't have been the son of God from just one premise that is, he eats, it's a blatant non-sequitur, but it also commits a false dichotomy fallacy that one can either eat or be the son of God, and also commits an Ad Hominem fallacy at the end by attacking the critic.

The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded. (Quran 5:75)

unfalsifiable fallacy - In the verse that follows, Quran responds to a question asking for evidence by simply saying that the one asking the question is arrogant. It’s not only an unfalsifiable fallacy but also an egregious Ad Hominem fallacy.

And those who do not expect the meeting with Us say, "Why were not angels sent down to us, or [why] do we [not] see our Lord?" They have certainly become arrogant within themselves and [become] insolent with great insolence. (Quran 25:21)

Appeal to popularity fallacy - Here the Quran Argues that people should believe just because most people around them believe in Allah.

And when it is said to them, "Believe as the people have believed," they say, "Should we believe as the foolish have believed?" Unquestionably, it is they who are foolish, but they know [it] not. (Quran 2:13)

Begging the Question - Quran in many verses such as the one that follows asserts that Allah is the creator of everything and you should believe this because you were created by him.

How can you disbelieve in Allah when you were lifeless and He brought you to life; then He will cause you to die, then He will bring you [back] to life, and then to Him, you will be returned. (Quran 2:28)

Appeal to force - Quran at many occasions such as the one that follows threatens those who disbelieve to essentially make them accept the conclusion out of sheer fear for their lives.

Have they not seen how many generations We destroyed before them which We had established upon the earth as We have not established you? And We sent [rain from] the sky upon them in showers and made rivers flow beneath them; then We destroyed them for their sins and brought forth after them a generation of others. (Quran 6:6)

Straw-man - Quran regularly straw-mans it’s opposing position to assert that they are liars and one such instance is the verse that follows

And those who disbelieve say to those who believe, "Follow our way, and we will carry your sins." But they will not carry anything of their sins. Indeed, they are liars. (Quran 2912)

The Divine Fallacy - On certain occasions like the one that follows the Quran just says it’s obvious that he is the creator if you look at the wonders of creation. In other words, it says that the world is so, good that it must have a creator.

Say, [O Muhammad], "Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah, over all things, is competent."(Quran 29:20)

This is basically God’s version of “look at the trees” argument.

Hasty Generalization - Well, now most ex-Muslims are somehow criminals. Is this argumentation not worse than the arguments that nonintellectual Muslins present.

Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after your belief. If We pardon one faction of you - We will punish another faction because they were criminals. (Quran 9:66)

Loaded Question - In the following verse Quran says that if you ask Muslims they would say that it is Allah who created them but if that’s the case then they should be worshipping him. This is in a question form and it assumes that if someone created you then you should worship them.

And if you asked them who created them, they would surely say, " Allah ." So how are they deluded? (Quran 43:87)

False Cause - In the following two verses of the Quran it asserts a cause and effect relationship between mankind being in pain and turning to his very specific religion.

Indeed, We will remove the torment for a little. Indeed, you [disbelievers] will return [to disbelief]. The Day We will strike with the greatest assault, indeed, We will take retribution. (Quran 44:15-16)

Appeal to adverse consequences Fallacy - The verse quoted below commits multiple fallacies but the most apparent one being its appeal to adverse and undesirable consequences of disbelieving in order to prove itself correct.

And when he knows anything of Our verses, he takes them in ridicule. Those will have a humiliating punishment. (45:9)

Ad Hominem - The verse below most apparently says that disbelievers who have read or listened to the Quran are sinful liars which is rather than attacking their arguments is attacking them.

Woe to every sinful liar. Who hears the verses of Allah recited to him, then persists arrogantly as if he had not heard them. So give him tidings of a painful punishment. (Quran 45:7-8)

The Argument of repetition fallacy - In the entire Surah, Rehman Quran keeps presenting the same point that he is the one true God because he has done favors for you. While the point itself is extremely fallacious but the approach is way more fallacious than the point. What I have presented below is a taste of what surah Rehman’s repetition is like.

And grain having husks and scented plants. So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny? (Quran 55:12-13).

[He is] Lord of the two sunrises and Lord of the two sunsets. So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny? (Quran 55:17-18).

From both of them emerge pearl and coral. So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny? (Quran 55:22-23)

So on and so forth…

The appeal to consequences fallacy - The following verse insists that you should believe the Quran is speaking the truth because if you do that then you would be rewarded.

Believe in Allah and His Messenger and spend out of that in which He has made you successors. For those who have believed among you and spent, there will be a great reward.

Wishful thinking fallacy - In many of its verses such as the one that follows the Quran, makes its gullible readers dwell in wishful thinking, granting it some legitimacy in their minds.

And your Lord is going to give you, and you will be satisfied. (Quran 93:5)

Proof by assertion Fallacy - This verse like the representative of a quarter of the Quran where it just tries to prove itself by just making assertions.

And of His signs is that you see the earth stilled, but when We send down upon it rain, it quivers and grows. Indeed, He who has given it life is the Giver of Life to the dead. Indeed, He is over all things competent. (Quran 41:39)

Other quarters are the argument from authority, appeal to emotion, and ad hominems.

Ipse Dixit - Here like in many others of its verses Quran effectively asks is it not self-evident that this religion is true.

We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness? (Quran 41:53)

Slippery Slope - Here Quran asserts that one event would inevitably lead to another, multiple times which it does without sufficient data, or reason if any at all.

O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those other than yourselves, for they will not spare you [any] ruin. They wish you would have hardship. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater. We have certainly made clear to you the signs if you will use reason. (Quran 3:118)

Kafka Trapping Fallacy - Quran in many of its verses emotionally manipulates its readers and tries to ignite the feeling of guilt to convince them that his book is true.

The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah and then did not take it on is like that of a donkey who carries volumes [of books]. Wretched is the example of the people who deny the signs of Allah. And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people. (Quran 62:5)

Gambler’s fallacy - Here Quran asserts that if a nonbeliever is asked whether they want to die or not, they will say they don’t. Now, that somehow means that they know that Allah’s real. Lord indeed is the greatest of the gamblers.

Say, "O you who are Jews, if you claim that you are allies of Allah, excluding the [other] people, then wish for death, if you should be truthful." But they will not wish for it, ever, because of what their hands have put forth. And Allah is Knowing of the wrongdoers. (Quran 62:8-7)

Talk about causation.

No True Scotsman Fallacy - The verse that follows proposes a method to verify belief which cannot be used because of its unfalsifiability. It, therefore, commits a no true Scotsman fallacy.

The believers are only those who, when Allah is mentioned, their hearts become fearful, and when His verses are recited to them, it increases them in faith; and upon their Lord, they rely - (Quran 8:2)

Shifting the burden of proof - Quran rather than proving it's authenticity challenges non-believers to prove it wrong, evidenced by verses like

Say, "If mankind and the jinn gathered in order to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like of it, even if they were to each other assistants." (Quran 17:88)

The argument from Ignorance - Quran appeals to ignorance and the fear of ignorance found in the humankind of the time to legitimize itself, evidenced by verses such as

Do they not see the birds controlled in the atmosphere of the sky? None holds them up except Allah. Indeed in that are signs for a people who believe. (Quran 16:79)

Turns out, birds can fly from entirely natural processes and they do not need a holder to hold them in the air.

The argument from authority - Rather than proving itself as an authority Quran just asserts itself as an authority and comes to the implicit conclusion that therefore, all that is written in it is the ultimate truth and one such example is,

He is Allah, other than whom there is no deity, the Sovereign, the Pure, the Perfection, the Bestower of Faith, the Overseer, the Exalted in Might, the Compeller, the Superior. Exalted is Allah above whatever they associate with Him. (Quran 59:23)

False Dichotomy - Quran regularly presents blatantly false dichotomies such as that which follows, to try to convince nonbelievers that it knows better than we ever could.

Or were they created by nothing, or were they the creators [of themselves]? (Quran 52:35)

Circular reasoning - Here the argument presented is, a rhetorical question basically saying you can’t argue with me about God because he has guided me while proving that he has guided him.

And his people argued with him. He said, "Do you argue with me concerning Allah while He has guided me? And I fear not what you associate with Him [and will not be harmed] unless my Lord should will something. My Lord encompasses all things in knowledge; then will you not remember?

Affirming the Consequent - Here in the verse quoted below, Quran sets up a conditional saying that a book directly from God shouldn't have contradiction; Quran doesn't, therefore it's from God. While it's also a non sequitur it's most glaringly is the propositional fallacy known as "Affirming the Consequent".

Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction. (Quran 4:82)

Killing a person (i.e., a Muslim) is as killing all mankind (Quran 5:32)

Consider the following portion of a quranic verse:

“if anyone killed a person it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind.”

It is heavily used by "Uneducated Muslims" as well as apologists (*) and Islamic supremacists use all the time in an attempt to portray Islam as a peaceful and co-existing religion.

In reality this is just a portion of Quran 5:32. Unfortunately, the whole verse says something very different. And, if looked into the context of its neighboring verses, it sounds really bad.

As we will see, the real meaning is:

“if anyone killed a Muslim it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a Muslim life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind.”

Let us see what a tafsir, exegesis, has to say about it. I am quoting ibn Kathir, whose exegesis is very influential. Ibn Kathir (born c. 1300, died 1373) was a highly influential Sunni scholar of the Shafi'i school during the Mamluk rule of Syria, an expert on tafsir (Quranic exegesis) and faqīh (jurisprudence) as well as a historian. I am quoting an online version and subsequent pages.

First, a bit of context. Chapter (Sura) 5 was "revealed" in Medina, when Muhammed was already a War Lord, in the process of eradicating the Jewish tribes (5 in total) which refused to accept him as a prophet. Verses 27-34 retell the story of Cain and Abel, and they come within the context of a warning to the Jews, and is not presented as a universal principle. Thus this passage is explaining what must be done with Jews in particular (and all non-Muslims in general) who reject Muhammad, not dictating lofty moral principles.

To start ibn Kathir presents verses 5:32-5:34 together: 

32. Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

33. Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

34. Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

What ibn Kathir has to say:

"(We ordained for the Children of Israel...) meaning, We legislated for them and informed them,"

This confirms this is directed to the Jews.

"(that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind.) The Ayah states, whoever kills a soul without justification -- such as in retaliation for murder or for causing mischief on earth -- will be as if he has killed all mankind, because there is no difference between one life and another."

Note the two conditions for permissible killing "retaliation for murder or for causing mischief on earth." What are those?

"(it would be as if he killed all mankind.) means, "Whoever kills one soul that Allah has forbidden killing, is just like he who kills all mankind.'' Sa`id bin Jubayr said, "He who allows himself to shed the blood of a Muslim, is like he who allows shedding the blood of all people. He who forbids shedding the blood of one Muslim, is like he who forbids shedding the blood of all people.'' In addition, Ibn Jurayj said that Al-A`raj said that Mujahid commented on the Ayah,"

Oh, so Allah forbids shedding the blood of a Muslim

"(it would be as if he killed all mankind,) "He who kills a believing soul intentionally, Allah makes the Fire of Hell his abode, He will become angry with him, and curse him, and has prepared a tremendous punishment for him, equal to if he had killed all people, his punishment will still be the same.'' Ibn Jurayj said that Mujahid said that the Ayah,"

He is referring just to a "believing soul" (i.e., a Muslim).

So, the meaning is very different to what Islamic supremacists, uneducated Muslims or apologists try to imply! There is more.

"(And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with Al-Bayyinat,) meaning, clear evidences, signs and proofs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits in the land!) This Ayah chastises and criticizes those who commit the prohibitions, after knowing that they are prohibited from indulging in them. The Jews of Al-Madinah, such as Banu Qurayzah, An-Nadir and Qaynuqa`, used to fight along with either Khazraj or Aws, when war would erupt between them during the time of Jahiliyyah. When these wars would end, the Jews would ransom those who were captured and pay the blood money for those who were killed. Allah criticized them for this practice in Surat Al-Baqarah,)"

Here we go, those pesky Jews again. Remember, the verse is directed to the People of Israel.

Meaning of Mischief

 (“Do not make mischief on the earth”), that is disbelief and acts of disobedience.” Abu Ja`far said that Ar-Rabi` bin Anas said that Abu Al-`Aliyah said that Allah’s statement,

(And when it is said to them: “Do not make mischief on the earth,”), means, “Do not commit acts of disobedience on the earth. Their mischief is disobeying Allah, because whoever disobeys Allah on the earth, or commands that Allah be disobeyed, he has committed mischief on the earth. Peace on both the earth and in the heavens is ensured (and earned) through obedience (to Allah).” Ar-Rabi` bin Anas and Qatadah said similarly.

This is important. Disobeying Sharia is doing mischief on the earth!

The Punishment of those Who Cause Mischief in the Land

"(The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land.) `Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Mischief in the land refers to various types of evil."

"“Was revealed concerning the idolators, those among them who repent before being apprehended, they will still be liable for punishment for the crimes they committed.” The correct opinion is that this Ayah is general in meaning and includes the idolators and all others who commit the types of crimes the Ayah mentioned.

Ibn Kathir then quotes a Tradition of the Prophet, that shows Muhammed torturing people to death:

Al-Bukhari and Muslim recorded that Abu Qilabah `Abdullah bin Zayd Al-Jarmi, said that Anas bin Malik said, “Eight people of the `Ukl tribe came to the Messenger of Allah and gave him their pledge to follow Islam. Al-Madinah’s climate did not suit them and they became sick and complained to Allah’s Messenger. So he said," "(Go with our shephard to be treated by the milk and urine of his camels.) So they went as directed, and after they drank from the camels’ milk and urine, they became healthy, and they killed the shepherd and drove away all the camels. The news reached the Prophet and he sent (men) in their pursuit and they were captured. He then ordered that their hands and feet be cut off (and it was done), and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron. Next, they were put in the sun until they died.”

The commentary continues with something very interesting, since it refers to “Muslim Land”:

(they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land.) `Ali bin Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas said about this Ayah, `He who takes up arms in Muslim land and spreads fear in the fairways and is captured, the Muslim Leader has the choice to either have him killed, crucified or cut off his hands and feet.”

Remember that the State of Israel is located in “Muslim Land” (land conquered militarily by Jihad).

(That is their disgrace in this world,) “Meaning, shame, humiliation, punishment, contempt and torment in this life, before the Hereafter,

(and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.) in the Fire of Jahannam.”

Finally, “those who repent before they are apprehended” means “for the Muslims who commit this crime and repent before they are apprehended, the punishment of killing, crucifixion and cutting the limbs will be waved.” Those punishments  are clearly indicated by “this Ayah [verse] … that it applies to the idolators.”

(*) A reminder, both US presidents Bush and Obama used this passage outside of its context in an attempt to portray Islam as a "Religion of Peace."

Links for Tafsir ibn Kathir:

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=787&Itemid=60
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=786&Itemid=60
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=785&Itemid=60
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=784&Itemid=60
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=783&Itemid=60

The Reality of Friendship in Islam

Any Muslim who believes in the Quran and the prophethood of Muhammad should never be trusted.

Any Muslim who takes the beliefs and demands of Islamic theology seriously is like a loaded weapon that could spontaneously explode or backfire at any moment.

Even the Muslims cannot trust their own family and friends. You leave Islam or criticize Mohammed and you die.

>>>>>

The Reality of Friendship in Islam (http://www.faithfreedom.org/)

Friendship is only possible in Islam if both parties remain in the religion forever. For Muhammad has ordered that Muslims who leave Islam must be killed.

If there are two Muslims sitting in front of the computer reading this article, they must admit that they should kill their friend if he or she tried to leave Islam.

Muhammad’s Islam even demands that a Muslim should disown his or her family members if they attempt to leave the religion. It says so right in the supposedly perfect Quran!

009.023
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.

PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers.

SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and whoever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

Islam is poisonous to human relationships. Whether a person is born into Islam or becomes a Muslim through conversion, they must remain in the religion for the rest of their lives or risk being killed by their former Muslim “brothers and sisters”. Muhammad said that those who leave Islam are to be killed:

Hadith, Sahih Bukhari: Vol.9, Bk.84, No.57:
Narrated ‘Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.’”

In Chapter 004, Verses 088 through 091 of the Quran, it also states that apostates should be killed.

And these are supposedly the words of the creator of this vast and beautiful universe? Not a chance. It is worth considering the above verse 009.023 of the Quran and its meaning for a moment before delving further into the topic of friendship in Islam.

In Verse 009.023 of the Quran, Muhammad is claiming that God has commanded him to inform “his followers” that they must rank Islam ahead of their own family in importance. In other words, Muhammad has said that Muslims should virtually disown their own family members should they simply choose not to remain Muslim. At minimum the family member is to be heartlessly ostracized.

Can you imagine being a Muslim parent or child and having to obey this verse should the reality arise within your own family? This tragic situation has arisen within millions of Muslims families throughout the centuries, and millions have been killed by their own families due to Islamic apostasy laws. Such is the sickening legacy of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let us now consider friendship in Muhammad’s Islam:

There can be no true friendship between Muslims. Friendship in Islam is contingent upon continued adherence to the religion. In other words, if a Muslim simply chooses to leave Islam for his own reasons, his Muslim friends must consider him a traitor to the Muslim Ummah, an enemy of God, a worthless failure and an Apostate that should be killed.

Let us now further consider the reality of friendship amongst Muslims themselves. This topic concerned me greatly when I was a Muslim. For inside I knew the answers to the questions that I was asking myself…. and the truth was deeply disturbing. Some of the questions that I asked myself were as follows:
If I were to leave Islam would my Muslim friends have to dump ME?

Does this mean that if one of my Muslim friends chose to leave Islam that I would have to dump THEM?
The answers to these fundamental questions helped open the door for me and leave Muhammad’s Islam. These and other “Islamic realities” led me to a critical study of Islam that helped free me from its perverse falsehoods.

Obviously real friendship is profound and is to be highly respected and cherished. Many know how important friendship is to human health, happiness and our general development as individuals. Tragically, there can be no genuine friendship in Islam. Many Muslims still do not understand this basic fact but are beginning to sense that something is very wrong with their religion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now let us look to Islam’s “holy book,” the Quran, and see what it has to say regarding friendship:

003.028
Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.

005.051
O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

005.080
Thou seest many of them turning in friendship to the Unbelievers. Evil indeed are (the works) which their souls have sent forward before them (with the result), that Allah’s wrath is on them, and in torment will they abide.

058.014
Turnest thou not thy attention to those who turn (in friendship) to such as have the Wrath of Allah upon them? They are neither of you nor of them, and they swear to falsehood knowingly.

060.013
O ye who believe! Turn not (for friendship) to people on whom is the Wrath of Allah, of the Hereafter they are already in despair, just as the Unbelievers are in despair about those (buried) in graves.

In conclusion, it should be obvious to all decent human beings that Islam’s treatment of friendship is severely perverse. There are many valid reasons why a person would choose to leave Islam. Upon close inspection, Islam is the obvious fraud of a very, very deranged con man who may have never even existed.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/

Muslims invent crimes in which they play the victim, so that they can claim to be victims of "hate crime"

Orthodox Muslims will do anything to claim victimhood status. They do this because Mohammed did it in his own time, and it worked. They are just following the example of their "prophet" and the naïve West seems to fall for it all the time. This is nothing else than takiyya, the religiously sanctioned lie that can be use whenever that lie helps the spread of Islam.

This is a form of jihad being waged in Western countries, in the sense that, playing the victim, orthodox Muslims can lay claim "special treatment" which makes aspects of Islamic law (sharia) are introduced slowly becoming part the foundations of society, for the establishment of Islamic law when Muslims have sufficient numbers to claim it.

Austria: Muslims Set Fire to Own Fast-Food Business and Leave 'Racist' Graffiti to Mislead Investigators

A couple of weeks ago a pizzeria owned by Albanian Muslims in Wörgl, Austria, was badly burned. A nearby building owned by a Turkish association was also set on fire. 'Racist' graffiti in Turkish was left on the scene, complete with swastika symbols. This immediately provoked demonstrations from Turks and Greens protesting against "right-wingers" and "racists". One placard read : "Racism isn't an opinion! Racism is a crime".  It has now emerged, though, the both fires were set by the Muslims themselves. They were in dire financial circumstances and wanted the insurance payment. The 'racist' graffiti was simply left to mislead the investigators. Fortunately, two of the Muslim perps were injured in their own attack when the fire they were setting produced an explosion (feb, 2013, Islam versus Europe). 

Muslim mosque on fire
Brussels, Belgium. A Muslim of 34 years old, ax in hand, stormed a mosque on the outskirts of Brussels Monday and started a fire that resulted in the death of the Imam (March/2012, Voice of America).

Muslims set fire on their own mosque and accused Israeli settlers
On 3 October, a report by AFP, published by L'Express, among others, and copied by many French media reported the burning of a mosque in a Bedouin village in northern Israel, Touba-Zangariyya. L'Express assigned the blame to the "settlers" of Israel. The truth is that the mosque in Tuba-Zanghariya was torched by Islamists (Jan/2012, Mtzav blog).

 

A "hate crime" that had never been
A mosque in Marietta, Georgia (USA) was burned criminally. An Islamic organization known by the acronym CAIR (Council of American-Islamic Relations, and the arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. and Canada) complained that the fire was a "hate crime" against Muslims (Jul/2010, AJC). In fact, the fire was caused by Tamsir Lucien Mendy, a native of Gambia. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison after pleading guilty for the crime (Jan/2012, AJC).

 

Flashback (from Atlas Shrugs)

From "CAIR's Hate Crimes Nonsense" by Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha: (via Jihadwatch). See more cases in "More Muslim hate crime myth" by Daniel Pipes.

CAIR cites the July 9, 2004 case of apparent arson at a Muslim-owned grocery store in Everett, Washington. But investigators quickly determined that Mirza Akram, the store's operator, staged the arson to avoid meeting his scheduled payments and to collect on an insurance policy. Although Akram's antics were long ago exposed as a fraud, CAIR continues to list this case as an anti-Muslim hate crime.

CAIR also states that "a Muslim-owned market was burned down in Texas" on August 6, 2004. But already a month later, the owner was arrested for having set fire to his own business. Why does CAIR include this incident in its report?

CAIR lists the March 2005 lawsuit filed by the Salmi family for the firebombing of their family van as one example of a hate crime report it received in 2004. However, the crime named in the lawsuit occurred in March 2003, was already reported by CAIR in 2003, and should not have been tabulated again in the 2004 report.

CAIR reports that "a home-made bomb exploded outside of the Champions Mosque in the Houston suburb of Spring, Texas," staking its claim on eyewitness reports that on July 4, 2004, "two white males" were seen placing the bomb. We inquired about the incident and found that Spring's sheriff department could not locate any police files about an explosion. Further inquiries to the mosque and an e-mail to CAIR both went unanswered. There is scant evidence that any crime even occurred.

CAIR notes that "investigators in Massachusetts are still investigating a potential hate-motivated arson against the Al-Baqi Islamic Center in Springfield." However the case was long ago ruled a simple robbery, news that even CAIR's own website has posted. The Associated Press reported on January 21, 2005, that prosecutors determined the fire was set by teen-age boys "who broke into the Al-Baqi mosque to steal money and candy, then set the fire to cover their tracks." The boys, they clarified, "weren't motivated by hatred toward Muslims."

CAIR describes what happened to a Muslim family in Tucson, Arizona: "bullet shots pierced their home as they ate dinner in October 2004" and two months later their truck was smashed and vandalized. But the only evidence that either incident was motivated by hate of Muslims is the Dehdashti family itself, not the police. Detective Frank Rovi of Pima County Sheriff's Department, who handled the shooting investigation, said that according to the neighbors, the desert area by the Dehdashti house was often used for target practice. Neither incident was classified as a hate crime and both cases were closed by February 2005, long before the CAIR report went to press.

Of twenty "anti-Muslim hate crimes" in 2004 that CAIR describes, at least six are invalid – and further research could likely find problems with the other fourteen instances.

Should a group with a track record like this really be given a pass by AP and Minnesota education authorities?

"Muslim Group: Hate Incidents On Rise In MN Schools," from AP, March 24 (thanks to Wheeler):

ST. PAUL (AP) ― A Muslim civil rights group is calling on the Department of Education to investigate reports of racial and religious tensions in Minnesota public schools.

The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations asked for the department's help Wednesday, following reports of anti-Muslim incidents around the state.

Muslim students have allegedly been called names and faced harassment by students and teachers. In one case, CAIR says, two students shoved pork bacon in the faces of Muslim high school girls. Muslims do not eat pork.

In another case, CAIR says, a bus driver went past Muslim students waiting at a bus stop. And CAIR says a teacher told students to spray air freshener when Muslim students entered a room.

 

 

Three Stages of Jihad

From Acts17Apologetics:

Jihad proceeds in stages. Stage One: Stealth Jihad. Stage Two: Defensive Jihad. Stage Three: Offensive Jihad.

Watch the movie http://www.answeringmuslims.com/p/jihad.html



Three

Stages of

Jihad

Allah has bought of the believers

their persons and their property for this,

that they shall have the garden; they fight

in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain."

-Qur'an 9:111

"Mohammad is the Messenger of Allah,

and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers,

and merciful among themselves."

-Qur'an 48:29

Deception in the Media

On November 5^lh, 2009, a Muslim Army Major named Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire at Fort Hood in Texas. Many innocent people died, and Hasan has been charged with thirteen counts of premeditated murder and more than thirty counts of attempted murder.

Shortly after the Fort Hood shooting, CNN posted an article titled "Murder Has No Religion" (by Arsalan Iftikhar), which claimed that such attacks are forbidden in Islam. The article began:

Most of the world's 1.57 billion Muslims know that the Holy  Quran states quite clearly that, "Anyone who kills a human being ... it shall be as though tie has killed all of mankind. ... If anyone  saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of al! of mankind." (http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/09/ iftikhar.fort.hood/index.html)

Notice that the article portrays Islam as a religion that condemns killing of any kind. But is this what the Qur'an actually says? Unfortunately for CNN's readers, the author didn't give a reference, so readers were left to find the quotation themselves. Yet when we rum to 5:32-33 of the Qur'an (the source of CNN's severely edited quotation), we get a surprisingly different picture of killing in Islam:

For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle 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.

Two things are worthy of note in this passage. First, the teaching appealed to by CNN (“whoever slays a soul... it is as though he slew all men") was given “to the children of Israel” (i.e. the Jews). It was not given to Muslims. Second, even if Westernized Muslims want to apply this verse to themselves, the verse obviously permits killing people who spread “mischief in the land.” Indeed, the very next verse commands Muslims to murder, crucify, and dismember those who wage war against Islam and “make mischief” in Muslim lands.

Since the United States has maintained a military presence in predominantly Islamic countries, knowledgeable Muslims understand that, according to Muhammad, U.S. soldiers meet the “mischief-making” criterion, and should therefore be killed. It’s no coincidence that Major Hasan targeted soldiers, many of whom were being deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Thus, CNN quoted two carefully edited portions of a passage that justifies the killing of enemy combatants and used them to show that Islam condemns attacks such as the Fort Hood shooting. While deceptions like this are easily spotted, there is much confusion in the world concerning the role of violence in Islam. This short pamphlet will clear up some of the confusion.

Peace, Violence, and Abrogation

Muslims in the West are quick to point to passages such as Qur’an 109:6 ("You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion") and 2:256 ("There is no compulsion in religion") as evidence that Islam is a religion of peace. When confronted with harsher passages such as 9:5 ("Slay the idolaters wherever you find them") and 9:29 ("Fight those who believe not in Allah"), Westernized Muslims interpret these verses in light of the more peaceful teachings of the Qur'an, typically saying something like: “Well, the Qur'an can’t be commanding us to kill unbelievers, since it says that there’s no compulsion in religion."

Hence, Westernized Muslims pick the verses of the Qur'an they find most attractive, and they use these verses to sanitize the rest of the Qur’an. But is this the correct way to interpret the Qur’an? Unfortunately, the answer is no. The Qur’an presents its own method of interpretation—the Doctrine of Abrogation.

Qur’an 2:106—Whatever verse we shall abrogate, or cause [thee] to forget, we will bring a better than it, or one like unto it. Dost thou not know that God is almighty?

Qur’an 16:101—When We substitute one revelation for another—and God knows best what He reveals (in stages)—they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

According to the Qur’an, then, when Muslims are faced with conflicting commands, they aren't supposed to pick the one they like best. Rather, they are to go to history and see which verse was revealed last. Whichever verse came last is said to abrogate (or cancel) earlier revelations.

What happens when we apply this methodology to Qur’anic verses on peace and violence?

The Call to Jihad: Three Stages

When we turn to Islam's theological sources and historical writings (Qur’an, Hadith, Sira, and Tafsir), we find that there are three stages in the call to Jihad, depending on the status of Muslims in a society.

STAGE ONE—When Muslims are completely outnumbered and can’t possibly win a physical confrontation with unbelievers, they are to live in peace with non-Muslims and preach a message of tolerance. We see an example of this stage when Muhammad and his followers were a persecuted minority in Mecca. Since the Muslims were entirely outnumbered, the revelations Muhammad received during this stage (e.g. “You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion”) called for religious tolerance and proclaimed a future punishment (rather than a worldly punishment) for unbelievers.

STAGE TWO—When there are enough Muslims and resources to defend the Islamic community, Muslims are called to engage in defensive Jihad. Thus, when Muhammad had formed alliances with various groups outside Mecca and the Muslim community had become large enough to begin fighting, Muhammad received Qur'an 22:39-40:

Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them; Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: our Lord is Allah ...

Although Muslims in the West often pretend that Islam only allows defensive fighting, later revelations show otherwise.

STAGE THREE—When Muslims establish a majority and achieve political power in an area, they are commanded to engage in offensive Jihad. Hence, once Mecca and Arabia were under Muhammad's control, he received the call the fight all unbelievers. In Surah 9:29, we read:

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, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Notice that this verse doesn't order Muslims to fight oppressors, but to fight those who don’t believe in Islam (including the “People of the Book”—Jews and Christians).

Not surprisingly, we find similar commands in Islam's most trusted collections of ahadith (traditions containing Muhammad's teachings).

Sahih al-Bukhari 6924—Muhammad said: “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: La ilaha illallah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and whoever said La ilaha illallah, Allah will save his property and his life from me.”

Sahih Muslim 30—Muhammad said: “I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”

Here again, the criterion for fighting people is that the people believe something other than Islam.

It’s clear, then, that when Muslims rose to power, peaceful verses of the Qur’an were abrogated by verses commanding Muslims to fight people based on their beliefs. Islam’s greatest scholars acknowledge this. For instance, Ibn Kathir (Islam’s greatest commentator on the Qur’an) sums up Stage Three as follows: “Therefore all people of the world should be called to Islam. If anyone of them refuses to do so, or refuses to pay the Jizyah, they should be fought till they are killed.”

When Muslims Reach Stage Three

Abrogation also accounts for shifting attitudes regarding Jews and Christians in the Qur’an. While Muslims are to be friendly to Jews and Christians when the former are outnumbered, the Islamic position changes when Muslims reach Stage Three, at which point Christians and Jews are to recognize their inferior status and pay the Jizyah (a payment made to Muslims in exchange for not being killed by them). Consider some of Muhammad's later teachings about Christians and Jews:

Qur’an 5:51—O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of

them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Qur’an 9:30—And the Jews say: Uzair 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!

Qur’an 98:6—Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein. They are the worst of creatures.

Sahih Muslim 4366—Muhammad said: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”

Al-Bukhari, Al-Adab al-Mufrad 1103—Muhammad said: “Do not give the People of the Book the greeting first. Force them to the narrowest part of the road.”

Needless to say, these teachings can hardly be considered peaceful or tolerant.

Muslims in the West

Since Muhammad obviously commanded his followers to fight unbelievers (simply for being unbelievers), why do Muslims in the West deny this? Here we must turn to Surah 3:28, which reads:

Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security.

According to this verse (which uses a variation of the word Taqiyya, meaning “concealment”), Muslims are not allowed to be friends with non-Muslims. However, if Muslims feel threatened

by a stronger adversary, they are allowed to pretend to be friendly. Ibn Kathir comments: "In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship outwardly but never inwardly." Abu Darda, one of Muhammad's companions, put it this way: “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.”

Assessment

Is Islam a religion of peace? No. Islam is a religion that pretends to be peaceful when Muslims are too weak to win a war. When Islam is dominant, Muslims are commanded to subjugate or kill everyone around them. (Just look at how non-Muslims are treated in Muslim countries; compare this constant abuse and persecution with what is being proclaimed about “peaceful” Islam by Westernized Muslims.) Of course, there are many Muslims who aren't violent. Many Muslims in the West love peace and tolerance. But they didn't get these values from Islam. They got them from the West, and now they're reinterpreting Islam based on their Western values. For dedicated Muslims, however, there are only two possible situations to be in: (1) fighting unbelievers, and (2) pretending to be peaceful while preparing to fight unbelievers. Either way, conquering the world in the name of Allah is always the goal.

For Further Study

For a video detailed video discussion of this information:

http://www.answeringmuslims.eom/p/jihad.html

To learn more about these issues, be sure to visit these sites:

www.Answering-Islam.org

www.AnsweringMuslims.com

http://www.youtube.com/user/Acts 1 7 Apologetics

For some specific articles, please visit the following links:

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/swordverse.htm

http://answeruig-islam.org/Silas/femalecaptives.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/jihad.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi_mushrik.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/bada wi_tolerance.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/bada wi_holy_war.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/na_debate.htm

http://answering-islam.org/ AuthorsAVood7two_faces.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Wood/women.htm