Sunday, November 29, 2009
(Note: Surah 2 was the first Surah revealed after the Muslims migrated to Medina.)
So many abrogated verses, so little time to convince Westerners that these verses are still relevant to Islam!
Qur'an 2:106—“Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?”
Qur'an 16:101—“And when We change (one) communication for (another) communication, and Allah knows best what He reveals, they say: You are only a forger. Nay, most of them do not know.”
Qur’an 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, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
(Note: Sura 9 was one of the last two Surahs revealed, and therefore abrogates any Qur'anic teachings that conflict with it.)
Saturday, November 28, 2009
KHARTOUM, Sudan - A 16-year-old south Sudanese girl was lashed 50 times after a judge ruled her knee-length skirt was indecent, her lawyer and family said in the latest case to push Sudan's Islamic law into the spotlight.
The mother of teenager Silva Kashif told Reuters on Friday she was planning to sue the police who made the arrest and the judge who imposed the sentence, as her daughter was underage and a Christian.
The case will add fuel to a debate already raging over Sudan's decency laws after this year's high-profile conviction of Sudanese U.N. official Lubna Hussein, who was briefly jailed for wearing trousers in public.
Hussein, a former journalist who used her case to campaign against Sudan's public order and decency regulations, is touring France to publicize her book about the prosecution. She had faced the maximum penalty of 40 lashes but was given a lighter sentence.
Kashif, whose family comes from the south Sudanese town of Yambio, was arrested while walking to the market near her home in the Khartoum suburb of Kalatla last week, her mother Jenty Doro told Reuters.
"She is just a young girl but the policeman pulled her along in the market like she was a criminal. It was wrong," said Doro.
Doro said Khashif was taken to Kalatla court where she was convicted and punished by a female police officer in front of the judge.
"I only heard about it after she was lashed. Later we all sat and cried ... People have different religions and that should be taken into account," she said. SOURCE
Thursday, November 26, 2009
For example, he manages to make Muslims the victims of the Fort Hood shooting by saying:
This holiday celebration comes soon after the tragic incident at Fort Hood, when the atrocious act of a mass murderer put Islam and Muslims under some pressure to either denounce or defend their faith.Somehow, whenever a Muslim commits an atrocity under the auspices of Islamic teachings, Muslims are the victims. This is asinine. But he continues:
The psychotic act of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, MD, a Muslim American military psychiatrist at Fort Hood who went on a rampage killing 13 U.S. soldiers and wounding 30 others, has prompted two diametrically opposed reactions.What a misrepresentation of the truth! The people who are saying Islam is violent (the authors of this blog, as well as thousands of others) have no need to say "Islam ALONE" is violent, as if we are picking on Islam. Yet that is how he portrays those with whom he disagrees, and he does so emphatically. He also characterizes all the Muslims in an opposite group, as apologetic and arguing that their faith is peaceful and benevolent. I wonder if he would like to talk to Maj. Hasan, or his imam, or the boys in Revolution Islam, or Sadiq Abdul Malik, or anyone from Hamas, or al-Qaeda, or...
On one side are people who say that Islam -- and Islam alone -- is inherently violent and by extension Muslims are constitutionally driven to murder, while on the other are apologetic Muslims who argue their faith is peaceful and benevolent -- unrelated to criminal acts such as Hasan's.
As Dabashi doles out the drivel, he manages to ignore all the violent teachings of Islam, instead equating it to Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, etc. Just once, I'd like to see someone defend Islam as a peaceful religion in light of its actual violent teachings. Just once. But, of course, this is CNN: no objective view of Islam will be found here.
Then, the grand finale: Dabashi concludes his article with a panegyric on Malcolm X. According to this CNN article, until Americans ruminate on Malcolm X and incline themselves towards him, racism against Muslims will continue. Really, I kid you not. He said:
Until Americans come to terms with the fact that they are deeply indebted to a Muslim revolutionary for the fruits of the civil rights movement they enjoy today, Islam and Muslims will continue to be seen as archetypically alien and an everlasting danger to American lives and liberties.So that is the grand conclusion of this CNN masterpiece: Americans consider Islam dangerous not because of Islam's violent teachings, but rather because they forgot to include Malcolm X in their history books. Another wonderful reality check by CNN, courtesy of Hamid Dabashi.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
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 he has killed all of mankind. ... If anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of all of mankind."
Accordingly, it should come as little surprise to any reasonable observer that when Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan recently committed his shocking acts of mass murder at Fort Hood, Texas, America's Muslim community of over 7 million felt an added sense of horror and sadness at this senseless attack against the brave men and women of the U.S. armed forces.
The problem, of course, is that Iftikhar has to massacre 5:32 in order to pretend that it provides proof that Islam forbids killing. In context, and with the omitted sections of the verse reinserted, the verse proves that the Fort Hood Massacre was entirely consistent with the teachings of the Qur'an. The proof is in this video:
Saira Liaqat--Burned with acid for refusing to live with her husband before finishing school (holding a picture of what she looked like before she was attacked)
Naila Farhat--Burned with acid for refusing to marry someone
Zainab Bibi--Burned with acid for refusing to marry someone
Munira Asef--Burned with acid for refusing to marry someone
Shameem Akhter--Burned with acid by three boys who gang-raped her
Irum Saeed--Burned with acid for refusing to marry someone
Why do Muslims keep telling us that the veil protects women? Why do Muslims keep telling us that the spread of Islam will help the West?
For more on the women in these pictures (and other women burned by acid in Muslim countries), click here.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
To view all of Hasan's slideshow, click here.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
Sam and I will be back on TV this weekend. To watch the program, visit http://www.abnsat.com/abnlive.htm.
Here's the schedule:
7:00 P.M.-9:30 P.M. (Eastern Standard Time)
10:30 P.M.-1:30 A.M.
7:00 P.M.-9:30 P.M.
10:30 P.M.-1:30 A.M.
7:00 P.M.-9:30 P.M.
10:30 P.M.-1:30 A.M.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
RIFQA BARY ON "JESUS OR MUHAMMAD" (PART ONE, WITH JAMAL JIVANJEE)
RIFQA BARY ON "JESUS OR MUHAMMAD" (PART TWO, WITH PAMELA GELLAR, NEGEEN, AND ROBERT SPENCER)
APOSTASY IN ISLAM (PART ONE: THE QUR'AN AND THE HADITH)
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Andrew Grigoriou said yesterday he complained to the school and to police after his son Antonios was chased and later assaulted by Muslim students after a confrontation over the contents of his lunch.
Antonios, a Year 5 student of Greek-Australian background at Punchbowl Public School in Sydney's southwest, said he and a friend had to be locked inside the library for an hour after being chased by a group of Muslim boys offended by his choice of food while they were fasting. . . .
Other parents also complained to The Daily Telegraph about bullying at the school and claimed victims received too little protection.
One said her 12-year-old son was scared to open his lunch box at school because he was harassed about what is in it. "He has been bullied from day one . . . about being a Christian and about the hot salami in his lunch," she said. Read More.
In what could prove to be one of the biggest counterterrorism seizures in U.S. history, prosecutors filed a civil complaint in federal court against the Alavi Foundation, seeking the forfeiture of more than $500 million in assets.
The assets include bank accounts; Islamic centers consisting of schools and mosques in New York City, Maryland, California and Houston; more than 100 acres in Virginia; and a 36-story glass office tower in New York.
Confiscating the properties would be a sharp blow against Iran, which has been accused by the U.S. government of bankrolling terrorism and trying to build a nuclear bomb. . . .
The Alavi Foundation is the successor organization to the Pahlavi Foundation, a nonprofit group used by the shah to advance Iran's charitable interests in America. But authorities said its agenda changed after the fall of the shah.
In 2007, the United States accused Bank Melli of providing services to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs and put the bank on its list of companies whose assets must be frozen. Washington has imposed sanctions against various other Iranian businesses. Read More.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Pervez Masih: Pakistani Christian Dies Protecting Hundreds of Muslim Women from Muslim Suicide Bomber
ISLAMABAD, Oct 21: The courage shown by two unsung heroes, including one who lost his life during the two suicide bombings in the International Islamic University (IIU), saved lives of hundreds of girl students in the institution’s cafeteria on Tuesday.
Pervez Masih, a 40-year-old Christian worker, saved scores of lives at the double-storey cafeteria, where around 400 female students were present at the time of the attack.
“There would have been dozens of deaths had the suicide bomber not been blocked by Pervez Masih,” said Saifur Rehman, a senior security official of the IIU.
The other hero, Mohammad Shaukat, survived the attack but he is fighting for his life on a bed in the surgical ward of Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, as a shot fired by the suicide bomber hit him in lower abdomen.
Narrating the scene of the suicide attack on the cafeteria for women, Shaukat told Dawn that: “The attacker clad in a black burka was heading towards the cafeteria for female students at a time when they were having their lunch. I felt something wrong as no girl student, even one who observes veil, wears a head-to-toe burka on the women campus. I intercepted the bomber, who shot me, and I fell down but Pervez, who witnessed the scene, understood the designs of suicide bomber and held him at the entrance of the dining hall where the blast took place.”
Organs and flesh of the suicide bomber littered the entrance area and Pervez was thrown at the wall on the other side of the dining hall, said another eye-witness. Source.
While the media are busy trying to avoid the connection between Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan's actions and his religious beliefs, Pervez Masih, by sacrificing himself for others, has show the connection between his actions and his Christian beliefs.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
But, praise God, people are finally catching onto this disease, this politically correctitis leading to paralysis by fear and ultimately terminal niceness. According to Dorothy Rabinowitz, author of an opinion article on the Wall Street Journal:
What is hard to ignore, now, is the growing derangement on all matters involving terrorism and Muslim sensitivities. Its chief symptoms: a palpitating fear of discomfiting facts and a willingness to discard those facts and embrace the richest possible variety of ludicrous theories as to the motives behind an act of Islamic terrorism. All this we have seen before but never in such naked form. The days following the Fort Hood rampage have told us more than we want to know, perhaps, about the depth and reach of this epidemic.
This article is an excellent read. Highly suggested. And, in order to further battle the incidence ratio of this disease, I would like to fully quote Imam Aulaqi, the man who presided over the burial of Major Hasan's mother and who seemingly influenced his theology:
Nidal Hasan is a hero ... Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.
The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former.
The Muslim organisations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal's operation ... The inconsistency of being a Muslim today and living in America and the west in general reveals the wisdom behind the opinions that call for migration from the west. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold on to Islam in an environment that is becoming more hostile towards Muslims.
In light of Major Hasan's use of Allah's name as a battle cry, his inclinations against the US military's involvement abroad, and his clear association with pro-terrorist imams, I'm calling this what it is: Violence in the name of Islam, based off of Islamic doctrine. Take that, Islamophobiaphobia.
Osama wanted a Muslim source on honor killings. How about this one:
Sunan Ibn Majah 2540—It was narrated from Ubadah bin Samit that the Messenger of Allah said: “Carry out the legal punishments on relatives and strangers, and do not let the fear of blame stop you from carrying out the command of Allah.”
Here Muslims are told to carry out Islamic punishments against their own families. So if a daughter is behaving immorally, the family is to carry out the punishment. Any questions?
It's strange that a man who said he would skin his own sister alive if she became "loose and flirty" is challenging honor killings.
“But as before, there is no such thing as honor killings. Mathew 15:4 doesn't exist in the Quran.”I submit that this comment from Ali tells us more about Muslims than it does about Christianity:
1) Anyone who can find honor killings in the Bible, even though the practice is unheard of among Christians, can also find support for honor killings in an issue of Popular Mechanics or on a billboard sign advertising Happy Meals at Mcdonald's.
2) Anyone who can’t find support for honor killings in Muslim sources, even though honor killings are widely practiced among Muslims, is either ignorant of the Qur’an and Sunnah, or he/she believes it is appropriate to willfully deceive others about the same.
The following comments from Ali are surely enlightening in this regard:
“We muslims, because we are the most practicing followers of any faith, we take it very seriously. Which is why whenever someone speaks out against islam theres all those riots and that. Since christians dont practice much you dont really see any type of extreme activty.”
Hence, according to Ali, Muslims engage in honor killings, riots and other types of extreme activity because they are the most practicing followers of any faith. So, the question follows: Are Muslims practicing their faith or not when they engage in such activities? If they are not, then it would appear that Muslims are not the most practicing followers of any faith; if they are, then Islam supports honor killings, riots and other types of extreme activity.
Since Ali insists that Muslims are the most practicing followers of any faith, and since this leads to the conclusion that Islam supports honor killings, then Ali is either ignorant and inconsistent with regard to whether or not Islam supports honor killings, or he is simply being deceitful.
Monday, November 9, 2009
“He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people... The only way a Muslim could Islamically justified serving as a solider in the U.S. Army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.”
P.S. For those of you who might be wondering "Why do the guys on Acts17/Answering Muslims always focus on radicals and current events instead of Islam?" here's our point: Islam's teachings, historically, are violent. This is why Muslims can refer to chapter 8 verse 60 of the Qur'an, as this man did, to justify terrorism. That is why Muslims can refer to chapter 9 verse 29 of the Qur'an to fight Jews and Christians. Although we're glad many, if not most, Muslims consider Islam a peaceful religion, it seems they have ignored the clear teachings of the Qur'an, ahadith, and sirah. We seek to expose these violent teachings so that people may be aware of the true Islam, not a watered down one.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
P.S. If anyone ever knows where these guys are going to be, please let me know. I'm only a subway ride away from them, and I wouldn't mind having a nice street debate.
*NOTE: This man clearly states that the Qur'an 8:60 is the justification for these terrorist attacks - do we really need to wonder what Islam teaches and what many Muslims believe?
Firstly, no one says that Muslims should 'rise up to kills all americans' - READ THE FULLY QUOTE "Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor and that we should not be in the war in the first place."
Which I believe in too - which means military targets are viable during war, but NO CIVILIAN TARGETS (and before you mention civilians on the Army base - they are just a sad accident of war- much like the 1000's of dead Iraqi and afghan civilians right?).
I'm sorry guys, but it is time for you to admit when you are wrong to condemn - soldiers go to fight in wars, and in that incident, soldiers got killed - big deal!
Yeah so it happened on american soil, so what, american pilots and drone controllers will track down the enemies of the USA to their very homes and shoot a missle through its living room, despite their family being there or not. I guess the motto of the story is, do unto others, as you would have done unto you". Perhaps your christians should look at this incident, as a 'judgement of God' upon the wicked american army.
p.s. One thing I have noticed, for people who profess to love everyone, most of you are full of hate (your emotions are hateful, whether or not your tongue issues peaceful platitudes - repent now to the only God 'the Father').
So the attack was justified because it was a military target, and the civilians killed were "just a sad accident of war." According to Abdullah, then, Muslims in the U.S. military are justified if they open fire on military bases.
I have never said that we are at war with Islam, but others have been condemned for saying as much. I find it interesting, however, that even moderate Muslims like Abdullah al-Andalusi believe that Islam is at war with the West and that Muslims are justified in attacking any military target--even if the Muslims have sworn to protect their country "against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
For more on Muslims supporting Hasan's attack, see the following:
Washington D.C.'s Khadeeja Nuur and other Muslims Pray for Allah to Bless Hasan withe a Full Recovery
Killeen Mosque Member Sides with Attacker
Muslims at Fort Hood Blame the Military for Hasan's Attack
Here's a video of some American Muslims calling Hasan "an officer and a gentleman":
Isn't it strange that Muslim organizations like CAIR an ISNA are claiming that Muslims condemn such attacks?
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Ralph Peters on O'Reilly Factor
Ralph Peters in the NY Post
On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting, "Allahu akbar!" ("God is great!") committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.
What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Fort Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of nondenominational shoplifting.
This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it's an act of terror. Period.
When the terrorist posts anti-American hate speech on the Web; apparently praises suicide bombers and uses his own name; loudly criticizes US policies; argues (as a psychiatrist, no less) with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices; refuses, in the name of Islam, to be photographed with female colleagues; lists his nationality as "Palestinian" in a Muslim spouse-matching program and parades around central Texas in a fundamentalist playsuit -- well, it only seems fair to call this terrorist an "Islamist terrorist."
But the president won't. Despite his promise to get to all the facts. Because there's no such thing as "Islamist terrorism" in ObamaWorld.
And the Army won't. Because its senior leaders are so sick with political correctness that pandering to America haters is safer than calling terrorism "terrorism."
And the media won't. Because they have more interest in the shooter than in our troops -- despite their crocodile tears. READ MORE.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Since yesterday, Nidal Malik Hasan's family has been claiming that people made fun of him for his Muslim faith (as if this justifies the violence he committed). Indeed, such reports have been splashed across the major media outlets, in a rather obvious effort to build some sympathy for this poor, poor terrorist.
Unfortunately for Hasan's family and supporters, there's no evidence of such an anti-Muslim bias in the military.
Fox News--A Muslim veteran affairs organization says it has not received reports of harassment from Islamic soldiers, contrary to claims by a relative of the man authorities say is responsible for the worst mass killing on a U.S. military base.
Abdul-Rashid Abdullah, deputy director of the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council, told FoxNews.com that the nonprofit group has not received a single report recently of a U.S. soldier being harassed "simply because he was Muslim."
"That kind of report is inconsistent with what we've heard," Abdullah said prior to a press conference in Washington to denounce Thursday's shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, that left 13 dead and 30 wounded. Source.
But the mythical Muslim persecution doesn't end there. Muslims are calling for extra protection of their mosques in the aftermath of the Muslim attack against the American military.
Following the shootings at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas on Thursday, those at the Islamic Center for PEACE in Fort Myers have requested additional police patrols, though there have so far been no threats to the center.
Alibaba Lumumba, president of the center, said anytime there is a crime allegedly committed by a Muslim, the whole Muslim community suffers.
“But when there is a Christian who commits a crime, we don’t get into his religion or whether he wears a cross or not,” Lumumba said. “It’s a lack of knowledge about what Islam is and what it is not. Such acts of violence, especially if there were women, children or elderly who were hurt, are not condoned by Islam.” Source.
When a Christian commits a crime, he's acting contrary to the teachings of Jesus. When a Muslim kills non-Muslims (especially those who will be fighting against Muslims), he's perfectly in line with the teachings of Islam. But the media will never say such a thing.
So why are Muslims claiming to be victims when non-Muslims are being killed? As Robert Spencer notes,
CAIR knows well that victimhood is big business: insofar as they can claim protected victim status for Muslims in the U.S., they can deflect unwanted scrutiny and any critical examination of how jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence and supremacism. Source.
Indeed, CAIR has often resorted to fabricating hate crimes and statistics in order to mislead people into believing that hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise. P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry give the actual statistics in their new book, Muslim Mafia:
After 9/11, CAIR cited an explosion in anti-Islamic hate crimes in demanding more outreach with the FBI and special rights and protections for Muslims. "Unlike any other past crisis," CAIR claimed, "the post-September 11 anti-Muslim backlash has been the most violent."
But the latest Justice Department data on hate crimes reveal CAIR has been crying wolf. Not only are anti-Islamic hate crimes way down, but they're a fraction of overall religious hate crimes. The overwhelming majority of such crimes target Jews, something CAIR and other Muslim groups don't seem all that concerned about.
In 2007, a whopping 69 percent of religiously motivated attacks were on Jews, while just 8 percent targeted Muslims--even though the Jewish and Muslim populations are comparable in size. Catholics and Protestants, who together account for almost 9 percent of victims, are subject to as much abuse as Muslims in this country.
In the most recent year, anti-Islamic hate crimes totaled 115. While just one hate crime is one too many, that's a 26 percent drop from 2006 and a 76 percent plunge from 2001. And the number is minuscule compared with the 969 offenses against Jews. For every attack on a Muslim in this country, there are nine against a Jew. (pp. 141-2)
When are people going to catch on to the fact that Muslims are lying about what's in their sources, lying about the motivation behind terrorist attacks, lying about persecution against them, lying about their true allegiance, and lying about their ultimate goals in the U.S.? When are reporters going to turn to Muslim sources and realize that such lying is allowed in Islam?
*****UPDATE***** The Associated Press has announced: "Anti-Muslim Backlash Immediate over Suspect Accused of Killing 13 at Army Base." So there's been an immediate backlash against Muslims, eh? And what has this anti-Muslim backlash consisted of? Murdered Muslims? Bombed Mosques? No. AP offers only one instance so far:
The Arab-American Institute said it received one threatening call from an unidentified male shortly after Hasan's name was released. The group, which condemned the massacre, said it expected more.
That's it? A phone call? And a fearful expectation of more . . . phone calls? Have we even begun to fathom the control Muslims have over the media? A Muslim shot more than three dozen American soldiers while shouting "Allahu Akbar," and the media treats a phone call (assuming it even happened) as an "anti-Muslim Backlash."
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Those Muslims who say they love God and their neighbor, and who, in keeping with this, few though they may be compared to the greater body of Muslims in history, condemn the many irreligious and inhumane acts of their co-religionists, should weigh the following carefully.
According to Jesus, the greatest commandment is to love God above all else and with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and the second is to love your neighbor as yourself:
According to Muhammad, the greatest deed is to believe in Allah and his apostle, and the second is to participate in Jihad in Allah’s cause.
One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, "What commandment is the foremost of all?" Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' The second is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these." The scribe said to Him, "Right, Teacher; You have truly stated that He is one, and there is no one else besides Him; and to love Him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one’s neighbor as himself, is much more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices." When Jesus saw that he had answered intelligently, He said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." After that, no one would venture to ask Him any more questions. (Mark 12:28ff.)
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet was asked, "Which is the best deed?" He said, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle." He was then asked, "Which is the next (in goodness)?" He said, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." He was then asked, "Which is the next?" He said, "To perform Hajj-Mabrur. " (Bukhari 2:26:594; see also 1:2:25)--------------------
The disparity between the teaching of Jesus on the one hand, and that of Muhammad on the other couldn’t be clearer. But for the sake of those who are slow of mind and heart, consider the following brief commentary on the differences:
1. With respect to the first commandment/greatest deed, there is a monumental difference between merely believing in God and actually loving Him. Furthermore, even if we accept the baser idea suggested by Muhammad to be the greatest duty or the best deed, there is still a trenchant difference to be found between a faith that is directed at God alone, and one that is directed at God and a creature in addition to Him.
2. With respect to the second commandment/greatest deed, there is a difference of mammoth proportions between loving your neighbor, which clearly includes more than just fellow believers according to Jesus (cf. Luke 10:25-37, esp. 30-37), and engaging in Jihad, the full implications of which include warring against those who do not believe.
What Jesus taught about the first (and second) greatest commandment is undeniably greater than what Muhammad taught; what Muhammad taught about the first (and second) best deed is undeniably bested by what Jesus taught. It takes a very special person to say otherwise, and all too often they make the news saying it….just ask Major Nidal Malik Hasan.
Today, Major Nidal Malik Hasan launched a brutal attack at Fort Hood, leaving twelve dead and more than thirty injured. Hasan was a dedicated Muslim who was upset at the United States Military for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Prior to the attack against his fellow soldiers, Hasan had been saying that Muslims could rise up against the United States and suggested that Muslims blow up Times Square. However, no one wanted to kick him out of the military, for fear of being labeled "Islamophobes."
Not surprisingly, CAIR and ISNA have both condemned the attacks, claiming that there can be no religious support for such violence. Apparently, either our friends at CAIR and ISNA are practicing Taqiyya, or they have never read . . .
Qur'an 98:6—Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur'an and Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him)) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.
Qur’an 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, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Sahih Muslim 30—It is reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.
Sahih al-Bukhari 2785—Narrated Abu Hurairah: A man came to Allah’s Messenger and said, “Guide me to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.”
Sahih al-Bukhari 2796—Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, “A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah’s cause in the afternoon or in the forenoon is better than all the world and whatever is in it.”
Sahih al-Bukhari 2797—Narrated Abu Hurairah: The Prophet said, . . . “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred and then come back to life again and then get martyred.”
Sahih al-Bukhari 2810—Narrated Abu Musa: A man came to the Prophet and asked, “A man fights for war booty; another fights for fame and a third fights for showing off; which of them is in Allah’s Cause?” The Prophet said, “He who fights that Allah’s Word (i.e., Allah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism) be superior, is in Allah’s Cause.”
Sunan An-Nasa’i 3099—It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet said: “Whoever dies without having fought or having thought of fighting, he dies on one of the branches of hypocrisy.”
Sunan Ibn Majah 2763—It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever meets Allah with no mark on him (as a result of fighting) in His cause, he will meet Him with a deficiency.”
Ibn Ishaq, p. 130—[Muhammad said]: "Will you listen to me O Quraysh? By him who holds my life in His hand I bring you slaughter."
READ MORE: "Muslims Claim Victim Status . . . Again"