Tag Archives: jihad watch

The Bible Command Christians to Obey Islamic Governance

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Often times we hear Christians (see: Pamela Geller, David Wood, Sam Shamoun, Christians on FFI, Answering Islam, Answering Muslims), who align themselves with political groups claiming that the, “Shari’a” is immoral, backward, barbaric, archaic and ‘harmful to society’. Yet, if we were to ask them to define what Shari’a is, they wouldn’t seem to know. Some may point you to a Fiqh manual titled, “Reliance of the Traveller“, or quote for you some ahadith (plural of Hadith) or Qur’anic ayah as evidence of, “the creeping Shari’a“. However, they don’t know what the Shari’a actually is. The Shari’a is a body of law, which is both interpersonal and intrapersonal. It is sourced from the Qur’an, the Sunnah (Ahadith, Seerah), Ijma (consensus of scholars based on Qur’an and Sunnah) and Qiyas (analytic deduction). Therefore, as it is, there is no one ‘fiqh’ manual that embodies the Shari’a as a whole for Muslims. Fiqh can be defined as Islamic jurisprudence. What does this mean?

Shari’a is not:

  • Based on one man’s opinion.
  • Based on one scholar’s opinion.
  • Based on one fiqh manual.
  • Based on crowd justice (there are courts to try criminals!).
  • Based on a few Ahadith.
  • Based on a few Qur’anic verses.
  • Based on a few men’s opinions.

Shari’a depends on a vast consensus of scholars who hold positions verified and validated through noted certification by institutions of high academic standards (see: Umm al Qura University, the University of Madina, Al Azhar, Dar al Ulum, etc). A single mufti’s (Molvi, Maulana, Shaykh, Sheikh, Ustadh, Sidi, etc) legal ruling (fatwa) is not binding because it is one man’s legal opinion, unless it is verified through Qur’an, Sunnah and Ijma (previously defined above).

Intrapersonal Shari’ah:

This involves the personal beliefs and actions of an individual, this can involve performing Salaah, eating halaal, dressing appropriately, using appropriate language etc). In other words, it’s your personal moral standing that is dependent upon you and the Shari’a intends that you do good actions and not sin.

Interpersonal Shari’ah:

This involves the dealings and interactions of one person with another person, group of persons, his community and his legal obligations to the state. Usually this involves providing food for one’s family, obeying traffic laws, not stealing from others, not injuring or causing undue harm to anyone, paying taxes etc. In this form of Shari’a, this is what Islamophobes usually refer to as the creeping Shari’a. Nowhere in the Shari’a is one allowed to take justice into their own hands, we often hear of public whippings, beheadings, honour killings etc. However nowhere in the Shari’a are Muslims or non-Muslims for that matter, allowed to take justice into their own hands, in fact we have courts that are governed by Judges (a judge is a Qadhi), where matters are dealt with. One popular misconception is the rulings concerning rape and the punishment of the victim in Islam, I have previously written on this topic here.

The Bible Commands the Following of the Islamic Shari’a:

This might surprise many Christians, but the Bible actually commands its adherents to obey Islamic law. If you’ve read Macbeth or almost any Shakespearean play, you’d have come across the ‘Divine Right of Rulership’, wherein it is believed that rulers are destined by God to rule and therefore to rebel against a monarch would mean rebelling against God. Protestant England and Shakespeare did not invent this belief, it’s actually based on one of Paul’s Epistles:

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.  Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. – Bible : Romans (13): 1 – 7.

If I could have put that entire passage in bold, I would have. Clearly it is saying that the one in power, the governing authorities are instituted by God. Your God. What does this mean? Well, quite simply, if you are a Christian living in Muslim lands and their are Islamic laws, you must obey them. That’s right, this means living under Shari’a is condoned by Jehova, YHWH, Yeshua, Jesus, or whatever you call him. It doesn’t get much better for Tea Party followers in the United States, as opposing your President is tantamount to opposing God, similarly campaigning against Muslim politicians or liberties allowed by the law for Muslims, means you’re practically incurring God’s wrath upon yourselves.

Some might dismiss this understanding of the aforementioned passage by claiming that I’m a Muslim, therefore I am twisting ‘scripture’, therefore in response to this claim, let’s examine Christian Exegete, Adam Clarke’s commentary on the verses:

This is a very strong saying, and most solemnly introduced; and we must consider the apostle as speaking, not from his own private judgment, or teaching a doctrine of present expediency, but declaring the mind of God on a subject of the utmost importance to the peace of the world; a doctrine which does not exclusively belong to any class of people, order of the community, or official situations, but toevery soul; and, on the principles which the apostle lays down, to every soul in all possible varieties of situation, and on all occasions. And what is this solemn doctrine? It is this: Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. Let every man be obedient to the civil government under which the providence of God has cast his lot. 

As God is the origin of power, and the supreme Governor of the universe, he delegates authority to whomsoever he will; and though in many cases the governor himself may not be of God, yet civil government is of him; for without this there could be no society, no security, no private property; all would be confusion and anarchy, and the habitable world would soon be depopulated. In ancient times, God, in an especial manner, on many occasions appointed the individual who was to govern; and he accordingly governed by a Divine right, as in the case of Moses, Joshua, the Hebrew judges, and several of the Israelitish kings. In after times, and to the present day, he does that by a general superintending providence which he did before by especial designation. In all nations of the earth there is what may be called a constitution-a plan by which a particular country or state is governed; and this constitution is less or more calculated to promote the interests of the community.

The civil governor, whether he be elective or hereditary, agrees to govern according to that constitution. Thus we may consider that there is a compact and consent between the governor and the governed, and in such a case, the potentate may be considered as coming to the supreme authority in the direct way of God’s providence; and as civil government is of God, who is the fountain of law, order, and regularity, the civil governor, who administers the laws of a state according to its constitution, is the minister of God. But it has been asked: If the ruler be an immoral or profligate man, does he not prove himself thereby to be unworthy of his high office, and should he not be deposed? I answer, No: if he rule according to the constitution, nothing can justify rebellion against his authority. He may be irregular in his own private life; he may be an immoral man, and disgrace himself by an improper conduct: but if he rule according to the law; if he make no attempt to change the constitution, nor break the compact between him and the people; there is, therefore, no legal ground of opposition to his civil authority, and every act against him is not only rebellion in the worst sense of the word, but is unlawful and absolutely sinful. – Adam Clarke’s Commentary, Romans 13:1-2.

Conclusion:

Therefore, in closing, I conclude that those who fear Islamic Shari’a do not have a holistic and educated teaching of what it actually is, that they are playing on emotional fears for their own gain, whether monetary or otherwise (see: Argumentum ad Baculum). Following the Shari’a is no different to following a constitution of any nation where you reside according to Pauline doctrine, whom according to the Christian’s own belief is taught/ inspired by God Himself. Political Christians who are opponents of Shari’a simply do not understand it and are going against Biblical teachings.

wa Allaahu Alam,
and Allaah knows best.

Christians Have Blasphemy Laws Too

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Lately, there has been a lot of grandstanding by our Christian counterparts about blasphemy laws in Muslim countries. They seem to forget that they too have blasphemy laws that are still in use to this day. As it turns out, it was used this week against a former Christian, who ran a Facebook group about his apostasy. The Huffington Post reports:

A 27-year-old man has been arrested by Greek police  for what the authorities called “malicious blasphemy,” according to a HuffPost translation of a press release. Police allege that the man managed a Facebook page that lampooned the deceased Eastern Orthodox monk Elder Paisios , a widely popular religious figure, using the name “Gerontas (Elder) Pastitsios.” Pastitsios is a Greek pasta dish, and the page parodied the monk and his work in the vein of Pastafarianism, a lighthearted, satirical movement that promotes irreligion. In a screen shot of the group’s Facebook page, which now appears to have been removed from the social network, Elder Paisios is shown with a plate of pastitsios .

The Business Insider News website, has secured a translation of the police press release on the issue:

24-09-2012: H Cyber Crime Unit arrested 27-year old domestic for malicious blasphemy and kathyvrisi religions via Facebook
Athens, 24 September 2012

PRESS RELEASE

H Cyber Crime Unit arrested 27-year old domestic for malicious blasphemy and religious kathyvrisi through Facebook

The 27 year old managed page on Facebook with profane and abusive content for Elder Paisios and Orthodox Christianity

From Cyber Crime file formed Flagrant process against domestic 27 years old, who is accused of blasphemy and malicious kathyvrisi religions known through social networking sites Facebook.

More specifically, the Cyber Crime spotted recently in the famous social networking site Facebook, with data page ( http://www.facebook.com / gerontas.pastitsios ), which contained blasphemies and insults against Elder Paisios and Orthodox Christianity.

While the profane and blasphemous content of this page, the Cyber Crime has received thousands of e-complaints coming from residents of different countries around the world.

From police digital survey, conducted in conducting preliminary investigation calibrated logs (logfiles) and electronic trail of administrator – user page issue.

Then Friday (21-09-2012) morning team of specialist officers Cyber Crime held a proper inquiry, presence Prosecutors at his home at 27 years old Psachna Evia.

During the investigation found and confiscated a laptop computer (laptop). On the ground in this autopsy found that a computer administrator page in question was the 27 year old, who was arrested and the file that was formed against him led to Attorney Athens.

Recalled that, in such cases, citizens can contact the Cyber Crime, the following contact details.

Here are the blasphemy laws according to the Greek constitution which criminalizes insults against the Christian Church:

Article 198 – Malicious Blasphemy

1. One who publicly and maliciously and by any means swears blasphemes God shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years.

2. Except for cases under paragraph 1, one who by blasphemy publicly manifests a lack of respect for the divinity, shall be punished by jailing for not more that six months or by pecuniary penalty of not more than 3,000 euros.

Article 199 – Blasphemy Concerning Religions

One who publicly and maliciously and by any means blasphemes the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ or any other religion tolerated in Greece shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years.

Waiting for the outcry of ‘creeping Christianity‘ or ‘freedom marches‘ against the ‘barbarism of Christianity‘ because of their ‘blaspheme laws‘ which are ‘archaic‘. Pretty sure you won’t see this piece of news on Jihad Watch or Answering Muslims.

wa Allaahu Alam,
and Allaah knows best.

Why Robert Spencer Cannot Be Trusted

1. Spencer is no scholar of Islam

Firstly, Spencer himself claims he is a scholar of Islam, so to make such a powerful statement must be backed up with credentials. Scholar, Ivan Jablonka, stated that Spencer lacks “academic seriousness.

This is indeed true, because once we look at Spencer’s academic achievements, biography and scholarly claims, we find that indeed, Spencer has no academic qualifications whatsoever to claim he is a scholar about Islam. His friends seem to do so and this is highlighted on his website.

Academically, Spencer has only a Master’s degree in the field of religious studies.

If he is certainly no scholar, then him and his friends are indeed lying about his claims to pass off as an intellectual individual. If he is indeed lying, how then, can he be trusted? His credentials, online presence, website and statements then carry little weight.

2. Spencer cannot understand Arabic

Spencer has written about Islam, the Quran, the hadith and other Islamic sources that have been originally compiled in the complex Arabic language. Little does he know that the Arabic language is full of meaning and interpretation. But this makes it easier for him to misinterpret passages, especially without the reader knowing.

Academically, Spencer has only a Master’s degree in religious studies and not once in his life has he completed or undertaken an Arabic course or degree.

Most Islamic scholars study Arabic, Spencer lacks this crucial understanding.

3. Spencer tries to market and seek profit from books

As we know, Spencer is an author and has written numerous books about Islam. But you can see below that Spencer has uses Twitter not only to promote his web links, but also to conjure up interaction with leading or controversial professionals to try and promote his book.

Whether he is trying to make people interested in his book can be questionable, but raising awareness about it is certainly a promotional marketing strategy.

Even Spencer’s friends have tried promoting his work, such as conspiracy promoting anti-Muslim, Bat Ye’or, who wrote a surprisingly great review of Spencer’s book on Amazon.

Pamela Geller, Spencer’s close friend (co-founder of Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and the Freedom Defense Initiative) also wrote a positive review for the audience of her website trying to help promote his works.

4. Spencer uses conspiracy to sell books

Did Jesus exist? Did Moses exist? These have been famous conspiracy theories that have grasped people’s imaginations for centuries and allowed people to gain profit. Spencer recently worked on a new book titled “Did Muhammad Exist?: An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins”. And it seems to have sold.

Forgetting the fact that Muhammad’s life has been narrated by countless people, being recorded and recounted to hundreds if not thousands of people recollected in hadith, Spencer makes things very complex and shifts to small holes in which he regards as proof that Muhammad didn’t exist.

As an example, Spencer asks as to why the early Islamic coins fail to acknowledge Muhammad or the Muslim faith. The simple answer would be that it doesn’t matter and people didn’t have to do it. Nevertheless, these little irrelevant things show that Spencer has cherry picked certain ideas and made them into a big issue. Once all the small ideas are combined, they can be made into a controversial book that sells.

5. Spencer was named by Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik in manifesto

Spencer was named a total of 64 times by name in the manifesto created by Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik shortly before he killed more than 70 people.

Breivik was influenced by Spencer and even recommended Spencer’s blog posts in his manifesto. He even went on to say, ‘About Islam I recommend essentially everything written by Robert Spencer’

6. Spencer is closely linked to Pamela Geller who received an extremist email

Spencer himself co-founded hate-group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and the Freedom Defense Initiative with fellow friend and blogger Pamela Geller.

In 2007, Pamela Geller received a dangerous email from an anonymous Norwegian, who claimed he/she/or they, were “stockpiling weapons” on her blog AtlasShrugs. The email clearly read “We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast.” Bloggers quickly reacted, printscreened and Geller issued an article afterwards (because she most likely had to).

If this person was indeed Breivik, then Geller is to be investigated. If the person was not affiliated to Geller, then Geller is still to be investigated because this could be a potential terrorist case.

As we know, Spencer is very closely linked to this woman and ignoring this may result in devastating consequences.

Breivik even recommended Geller’s blog posts in his manifesto.

7. Spencer fear-mongers

Spencer and Geller together, have long been active in spreading the idea that the U.S. is going to ‘Islamized’, a conspiracy ideology that is also remnant in far-right groups such as the Netherlands Party for Freedom and the English Defence League. Together they founded Stop the Islamization of America group, who constantly preach about how the U.S. is being ‘Islamized’.

With his blog JihadWatch, Spencer aids his group and propagates the concept that Islam is slowly ‘creeping’ into the West, whilst also making people hateful of Islam and Muslims too. Here, we see how Spencer funds the association of honour killings and relating them directly to Islam.

This campaign was funded by the Stop the Islamization of America group around the U.S. Islam is clearly attacked and linked to honour killings even though mainstream Islamic scholars have condemned honour killings and have stated they have no place in Islam.

It must be understood that Spencer has less credibility than the majority of Islamic scholars who have studied Islam, the Quran, hadith, traditions and the language of Arabic. Spencer only has a Master’s in religious studies.

8. Spencer picks and chooses to support claims

Conservative scholar, pundit and author, Dinesh D’Souza, stated that “Spencer’s historical argument is dubious. Itemphasizes violent passages in the Koran, while downplaying the passages that urge peace and goodwill.

As we know, the Quran, as well as speaking of violence also speaks about peace, justice and tolerance. It is blatantly obvious, that Spencer hardly mentions these. He seems to simply reject them, without understanding the verses and passages are there. It’s like he deliberately picks and chooses to suit fit. He has done this technique in his books too, like how he omits the details of the Nakhla raid (further highlighted in LoonWatch’s Understanding Jihad Series).

In his works, he tends to pick out what ‘Islamists’ and extremists say, but fails to recognise the words and actions of mainstream Islamic scholars. He even admits this on his website.

Clearly, Spencer omits out important elements in his works (such as the concept of the inner Jihad and peace treaties during Muhammad’s time), hence giving readers the one side of the coin. By doing this, he can manipulate the reader.

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) correctly stated that “by selectively ignoring inconvenient Islamic texts and commentaries, Spencer concludes that Islam is innately extremist and violent”.

So if he continues to pick and choose facts and omit details that misleads the reader, then his credibility and bias is to be held into account. Ex-Nixon Aide and author, Robert Crane, correctly highlighted that “Spencer’s readers are carefully steered away from all contact with the Islamic interpretative tradition”.

9. Blatant anti-Islamic views

Charles Johnson, a former ally, friend of Robert Spencer stated that “Robert Spencer is an anti-Muslim blogger…And yes, I do mean ‘anti-Muslim’ — Spencer long ago crossed the line from simply criticizing radical Islamists to relentlessly demonizing all Muslims. And the bigoted, hateful comments he allows at his website are beyond disgusting.”

Spencer has also referred the Quran to the ‘Mein Kampf’, similar to hate-preacher Pamela Geller, who seems to be Spencer’s partner in crime. Comparing a religious book to Nazism is downright inaccurate and also hateful.

That being said, Spencer aims to highlight Jihad on his website, but with stances opposing Islam and referring the Quran as the ‘Mein Kampf’, it is an attack on Muslims themselves (like how Charles Johnson described earlier). So despite trying to highlight Jihad, it seems clear that Spencer is merely trying to demonize Islam and Muslim themselves(also see section 7).

M. Cherif Bassiouni, law professor, scholar and humanitarian, found the same rhetoric when he viewed Spencer’s website, stating, “After looking at your website, I was quite surprised to see how much hate, venom and misunderstanding you are fostering.”

Even in his book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Spencer states that ‘Islam’s only overarching moral principle is “if it’s good for Islam, it’s right”…’ But what about the Islamic pillar of giving charity (zakat)? Clearly, Spencer forgets this and misleads the reader to believe nothing good ever comes out of Islam.

As a self-confessed scholar of Islam, we would expect he would know about this. But it seems his bias shines straight through his work too.

10. Blatant anti-Islamic views even in his works

The first chapter of ‘The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)’ is “Muhammad: Prophet of War”. We know that Muhammad was indeed part of many battles, but he was also part of peace treaties, social justice, welfare and community work too. This is hidden from view in this book.

Muhammad is again attacked in Spencer’s book “The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion”. Again, Spencer hides facts about peace treaties, social justice, welfare and community work and focussing more on war and violence through omit and omission (highlighted in section 8).

11. Spencer preaches about Quranic violence and forgets Biblical violence

What’s strange is that Spencer is very enthusiastic to comment and write about violence mentioned in the Quran (perhaps its his job to do so, highlighted in section 12). But Spencer skips his own faith.

As mentioned earlier, Spencer has a Master’s degree in religious studies. So surely, he would know of all the violence mentioned in the Bible? Nevertheless, Philip Jenkins studied violence in the Bible and in the Quran, and found that the Bible is ‘far more violent.’

Spencer is quick to critic Islam, but doesn’t seem to critic his own faith. He’s even created a book named “Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn’t”.

This further shows he has bias (highlighted in sections 7, 8, 9, 10).

12. Spencer is funded

In 2011, the Center for American Progress released a report (called Fear Inc: ‘The Roots Of the Islamophobia Network In America’) showing that almost $43 million from seven charitable groups since 2001 served as a main driver of anti-Islamic campaigns and works.

The report stated that money had flowed into the hands of five key “experts” and “scholars”. These “experts” and “scholars” were Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer and Steven Emerson. It is said that these key players (with others working alongside them) have been helping spread the anti-Muslim rhetoric and propaganda. Page 7 of the report shows us the main network.

The report was even covered by Fox News.

Spencer and his close friend Geller simply reject the detailed report, with no proof provided as to why it might be fake. It is brushed off their shoulders.

Additionally, in October 2010, an investigative report by The Tennessean found that IRS filings from 2008 showed that Robert Spencer earned $132,537 from the David Horowitz Freedom Center (who help Spencer with his website), and Horowitz himself gained over $400,000 for himself in just one year.

Conclusion.

As this article highlights, Spencer cannot be trusted.

Islamic scholar, Carl Ernst, correctly stated that “the publications of Spencer belong to the class of Islamophobic extremism that is promoted and supported by right-wing organizations, who are perpetuating a type of bigotry similar to anti-Semitism and racial prejudice. They are to be viewed with great suspicion by anyone who wishes to find reliable and scholarly information on the subject of Islam.”

Upon analysis, we have seen that Spencer indeed, picks and chooses his words in his works (highlighted in section 8). He deliberately misses out key concepts of Islamic history and even relies on what ‘Islamic jihadists’ (section 8) say, and not even what other mainstream scholars have to say. Another example of representing one side of the coin is how Spencer highlights quotes of violence in the Quran and seems to forget the ones that urge peace and justice. This reflects a serious case of bias.

Spencer has a close association with hate-groups such as Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and has even links to key figures (surprisingly also connected to the Islamophobia network). Pamela Geller, a prominent hate-blogger, received an email from a terrorist (highlighted in section 6). Even if the email at hand (section 6) is not indeed the Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik, then it is indeed a potential terrorist case that needs to be investigated by the main authorities.

What we do know for certain, is that Anders Breivik was deeply influenced by the likes of Spencer (highlighted in section 5) and people are constantly being influenced by him, which can possibly lead to catastrophic consequences, as we’ve seen. With the use of fear mongering, Spencer and his group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) are manipulating the minds of the public. Breivik was one of these individuals.

As this article has highlighted using two well-researched reports (section 12), Spencer shows to have been funded by individuals or groups who have been closely linked together. Studies and research would suggest that Spencer is merely paid to do what he does. That is, to spread hate and criticize Islam and Muslims by any means necessary, whether it be to market his own books and even make close friends support his scholarly claims (i.e. reviewing his books to promote them for him).

But as for Spencer’s scholarly claims, they are clearly over-exaggerated by what seems to be the majority of his close friends and allies. This makes him pass off as an intellectual, when in fact, all he has is a Master’s in religious studies. He has not studied Islamic history, the Quran, or the hadith, whilst mainstream Islamic scholars such as Dr. Tahir ul-Qadri have dedicated their whole lives to studying the religion of Islam. They have more credential, expertise and reliability than Spencer.

In conclusion, there is more to Robert Spencer and his ‘scholarly’ claims than what meets the eye.

Written by Mr. F.