I Don’t Care How You Define “Real” Muslims, and Neither Does ISIS
After every attack by Islamic terrorists, we hear what’s become a rote response: “But those aren’t real Muslims. Islam teaches peace. No real Muslim would murder civilians.” This optimistic-but-empty platitude is repeated by everyone from horrified peaceful Muslims to naïve college students to jihad apologists deliberately lying about the attackers’ intentions. It’s so common and so wrong it may as well be titled the “No True Muslim Fallacy”.
After the Benghazi attack and “Innocence of Muslims” video that didn’t spark it, Dr. Zahid Bukhari, President of the Islamic Circle of North America, wrote, “No practicing Muslim would advocate violence in any form in response to cartoons or films, no matter how offensive.” After the Charlie Hebdo attacks, Piers Morgan wanted Muslims “To denounce [the attackers] as non-Muslims, to urge REAL Muslims – the vast majority who loathe these extremists as much as we do – to rise up against them, alienate and marginalize them, root them out of their society.” Islamweb.net informs us, “if any Muslim kills an innocent person, that Muslim has committed a grave sin, and the action cannot be claimed to have been committed ‘in the name of Islam.'”
So apparently thousands of people who mistakenly think they’re Muslim have been shooting, beheading, burning, or blowing their enemies up lately. These non-Muslims-who-think-they’re-Muslims have killed over 50,000 people, mostly “real” Muslims, in the last two years. Somehow these people, most of whom were raised Muslim from birth, have misunderstood Islam so badly that they’re doing exactly the opposite of what Islam says.
See this terrorist? His name is Moner Mohammad Abusalha. Dr. Bukhara, Piers Morgan and others might think he’s not really Muslim, but in fact, he is. Or at least, he was. He blew himself up in a suicide attack on a restaurant in Syria.
He was Muslim because he believed in a certain type of Islam that’s existed for hundreds of years, and has been studied and validated by many religious scholars. Not every Muslim agrees with this version of Islam, but this guy did, and millions of other Muslims do.
You know how I know this guy was Muslim? He told us.
He didn’t care if you don’t think he was a “real” Muslim. He didn’t need your permission to call himself Muslim. He was positive he was Muslim, and he thought others Muslims who don’t massacre their enemies aren’t real Muslims. He was supported by millions of other Muslims who either directly armed, trained, fed and housed him, or gave tacit support to his actions. Whether or not you gave him the “real Muslim” stamp of approval made no difference to him. It probably never crossed his mind.
By the way, Abusalha grew up in a gated community in Florida, graduated from high school and spent some time in college. All suicide bombers are poor and uneducated? Yeah, not so much.
In the end, denying his or any other terrorist’s religious faith is meaningless. Because our opinion about their faith means nothing, either literally or philosophically.
We need to realize something: we don’t get to decide what makes a “real” Muslim. Nobody needs our approval to label himself any religion he wants. Two western Christians (or atheists, or agnostics like me, or Muslims, or whatever) can argue for years about what makes a true Muslim. Who cares what they think? Do Christians need approval from Afghan Muslims before calling themselves true Christians? Do Baptists need approval from Catholics?
The definition of true Islam has been debated at least since the Sunni/Shia split in the 7th century. Sunnis and Shia have been killing each other for apostasy for 1400 years, and some Sunni extremists refer to Shia as “rafidha (‘rejecters of the faith’) and majus (Zoroastrian or crypto-Persian)”. Other strains of Islam, like the Sufis, have risen and sometimes been brutally oppressed by more powerful Muslim sects. The “what is true Islam” debate has been violently raging among Muslims for over a thousand years; why does anyone, especially non-Muslims in the west with no real understanding of Islam, think they can smugly decide what a real Muslim is?
If I’m curious about an avowed jihadist’s religious affiliation, I might do something totally crazy: I’d ask him. Because, you know, he and his buddies are screaming to the world what their religious beliefs are.
I know, I know. Someone’s about to say it. Some people have probably been screaming it since the first paragraph. So go ahead and let it out.
Now that you’ve shocked us with that newsflash, guess what? We already know that. Of course all Muslims aren’t terrorists. If I believed all Muslims were terrorists I wouldn’t have lived, worked and socialized with them in Kosovo, served in combat beside them in Afghanistan, invited them into my home, or taken one to a range to improve his pistol skills. Most Muslims are nothing like ISIS, and would rather kill an ISIS fighter than join him. You literally have to be stupid to believe that every last Muslim is a terrorist, or condones terrorism.
But you have to be even stupider than that to think none of them are, or that it’s just a tiny handful. The suicide bomber threat isn’t over because the suicide bomber I mentioned earlier was the only one ever. ISIS isn’t a small organization, and it’s funded by many Muslims all over the world.
Even our government tacitly admits jihadists are Muslims. Our President might be loathe to use the term “Islamic terrorism” (his people apparently even censored French President Francois Hollande’s use of the term at a White House meeting), and politicians like Cory Booker might outright refuse to even say the words.
But if our elected representatives truly didn’t believe jihadists were Muslims, they wouldn’t have terrorists like Osama bin Laden buried according to Islamic law. The military wouldn’t have temporarily banned female guards at Guantanamo from offending a war crime suspect’s Islamic beliefs by touching him while moving him from the prison to legal appointments. And if the rest of the Muslim world didn’t believe those terrorists were real Muslims, Muslim scholars wouldn’t have complained that bin Laden’s burial at sea violated sharia law and warned that Muslims would attack Americans in retaliation. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) wouldn’t have complained of guards at Guantanamo Bay force-feeding prisoners on hunger strikes during Ramadan. If nobody believed bin Laden or terrorists at Gitmo were real Muslims, why would our government, Muslim scholars and CAIR be so worried about offending their Islamic sensibilities?
Everyone knows not all Muslims are jihadists, but everyone with an understanding of reality knows jihadists are actually Muslims. So please, stop claiming you know what all real Muslims think. Nobody cares. At least, the Muslims who believe Islam commands them to slaughter people don’t. If you’re positive you know what “real” Islam is, find your nearest ISIS fighter and argue with him about it. Because wasting time trying to convince me that “real Muslims would never be terrorists” doesn’t stop your so-called fake Muslims from murdering people.
Chris Hernandez is a 20 year police officer, former Marine and currently serving National Guard soldier with over 25 years of military service. He is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and also served 18 months as a United Nations police officer in Kosovo. He writes for BreachBangClear.com and Iron Mike magazine and has published two military fiction novels, Proof of Our Resolve, Line in the Valley and Safe From the War through Tactical16 Publishing. He can be reached at chris_hernandez_author@yahoo.com or on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ProofofOurResolve).
Filed under: Writing | 16 Comments
Tags: jihad, veteran writers
chrishernandezauthor 
Although concerned about ISIS today and tomorrow, here is a thought provoking concern that is rarely talked about in mainstream media.
Think 25 -35 years out from now about those little 3 year olds who are being brainwashed of hatred today to hate and eventually kill Americans. I believe that is a much bigger generational problem to solve. You can drone out the bad guys today. But the kids they are raising and brainwashing today are going to be a much much harder lift downrange. This is a multi generational war on terror and the sooner Americans pull their heads out of the sand and instead dig in for the long haul, the better this country will be.
Particularly worrying given the age-profile of most Muslim countries at the moment (tons more children in relation to adults than in America or any European country). Next generation of jihadists might well be several times larger than this one.
Maybe, but that’s a bit like saying that the Democrats will enjoy electoral dominance in the 21st century because back in the 90’s the 18-24 year old demographic was overwhelmingly Democrat. People change their positions as they grow up, and by definition they rarely become extremists. If our drone attacks today will make most Arabs terrorists in 20 years, why didn’t our much more severe bombings of Germany and Japan turn those people into terrorists in the 1960’s?
They maybe real Muslims but their actions do not define the religion. It does not follow that to be a Muslim you must support other Muslims doing something you would normally disagree with.
I strongly disagree. It is the evil minority sects within a larger group that have committed the greatest atrocities in history. The majority belief is irrelevant and it is always the powerful minority sects such as the Muslim Brotherhood and ISIS that will determine the future of Islam. History supports that the peaceful majority will be brought into radical alignment by the armed and powerful evil minority. Unfortunately, the current administration agrees with you and you can see where that has led and will ultimately lead to.
This is the problem, in that nobody wants to recognize that Islam hits us in the blind spot we have regarding religious freedom and tolerance. There should have been a clause inserted into the Bill of Rights that said something to the effect that the right to religious freedom extends only so far as you are willing to extend it to others–In other words, when your religion espouses the violent overthrow of the Constitution in order to replace it with your religious law, as in Sharia, and that your faith preaches the subjugation of other faiths, as well as death to apostates… You don’t get religious freedom.
Islam is going to be a problem for as long as it exists, and has adherents. The fundamental tenets of the faith are incompatible with religious tolerance, and any fool suggesting “Coexistence” is possible with Islam is historically ignorant and due for a severe shock when they actually try living with Islam. The faith is only peaceful insomuch as it remains a tiny minority in a sea of other religions, and even then, it is prone to generational outbursts of fanaticism and violence. It’s notable that the biggest problems with the violence of Islam don’t come from first-generation immigrants here in the West, but the second- and third-generation children of those immigrants, who “suddenly” decide to get back to their Islamic roots, forgetting why their parents fled the hellholes their faith turned their home countries into.
I don’t see a solution to this issue with Islam, other than violence. You can try to live in peace with them, but the faith as a whole, cannot tolerate that. “Moderate” Islam is a lie, a lie of a religion that teaches that lying to outsiders is not only perfectly acceptable, but indeed, a mandate for the faithful. Find that in any other religion–You won’t. Islam is a religion based on subterfuge, dissimulation, and lies. In other words, the perfect faith for infiltration and insurrection against other authorities. That’s what it’s based on, and that has been its history since its founding.
“The fundamental tenets of the faith are incompatible with religious tolerance, and any fool suggesting “Coexistence” is possible with Islam is historically ignorant and due for a severe shock when they actually try living with Islam.”
Tell that to the hundreds of millions of Muslims that are coexisting peacefully today.
I’m still waiting for that anti-ISIS demonstration……they could muster 10k in Illinois and 10k in NYC for a support Palestine demonstration…anti ISIS/traditional Islam not so much. you mentioned hundreds of millions living in peace, considering 1.6 Billion Muslims on this planet that leaves hundred’s of millions not living in peace. that downside really sucks ass.
Synchronicity—I deal with a related question (What is a Christian?) in an article that was posted just this morning here: http://bahaiteachings.org/what-is-a-christian
Pardon the length, but I’d like to respond to your post on a couple of different levels, first by looking at the central question: What is a Muslim? (This applies equally to Christians or Bahá’ís or atheists or any group with a shared identity.)
Whether you believe ISIS members are ”true” Muslims (or members of Christian militias are true Christians) will depend on what criteria you use to establish a measure. Is a Muslim (or Christian or atheist) someone who merely claims to be that, or are they people who possess the properties and demonstrate behaviors that align with some objective measure. In your article, you propose that a (group identity here) is someone who says they are that, regardless of their behavior.
I’d like to pull this out of the highly charged religious context to explore the idea. Imagine you have a friend who professes to be a vegetarian. You see your friend numerous times at Five Guys chowing down on burgers. What do you conclude? That some or all vegetarians eat meat? That vegetarians are liars? That “vegetarian” is a meaningless distinction? Or do you perhaps conclude that your friend only claims to be a vegetarian, but isn’t?
If the claim is all that matters, then the word ”vegetarian” (which is defined as ”a person who does not eat meat”) becomes meaningless.
The same is true of such group identities as Muslim, Christian, atheist. When a survey conducted in Sweden revealed that a percentage of self-identifying atheists said they believed in a higher intelligence in the universe and that some of that number were comfortable applying the name ”God” to that Intelligence, it prompted Sam Harris to note sarcastically that maybe these folks didn’t understand what it meant to be an atheist.
Pope Francis recently said that: “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the gospel.”
His criteria is in the statement—the written record of Christ’s teachings, in which a Christian is someone who thinks, speaks, and acts according to an objective measure. For example, “Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: … But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand…” – Matthew 7:22-27
If you looked at some of the loudest professors of Christianity today, you might conclude that the sayings of Christ focused on drawing lines between them and us, and promoting segregation based on race, religion, nationality, gender and sexual orientation. But that’s not the measure that Christ uses. Asked what was the greatest commandment, he responded: “‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 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: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.” – Mark 12:28-30 Christ illustrates what “love your neighbor ” means by telling a story in which a Jew is rescued by a member of a group with whom Jews shared a mutual hatred. He ends this illustration with the words ”Go, and do likewise.”
Faith is as faith does. This is true of any philosophy or world view. Thus, it seems logical to me to identify members of a group by how well their attitudes and behaviors match up with a standard that they profess to hold in common—to judge them by their fruits, as Christ put it, not by their words alone.
Muhammad, no less than Christ, proposed an attitude and behavior that was to exemplify followers of Islam. In one of his earliest Surihs, he asks: ”Hast thou observed him who belieth religion? That is he who repelleth the orphan, and urgeth not the feeding of the needy. Ah, woe unto worshippers who are heedless of their prayer; who would be seen (at worship) yet refuse small kindnesses!” — Qur’an, Surih 107:1-7
Muhammad repeatedly calls upon his followers to be just, merciful, forgiving, truthful. He also gives a series of commandments (most in the 2nd Surih) having to do with warfare that include never beginning hostilities, or attacking non-combatants, or ruining wells, or destroying crops, or slaughtering those who had surrendered—all of which are behaviors ISIS and other terrorist groups have indulged in. The Qur’an unambiguously instructs Muslims to fight only against persecution and to stop fighting and forgive if the other party ceases that persecution and sues for peace.
Are people who break a faith’s laws as much Muslim or Christian or [your group here] as those who keep them? Is a vegetarian who eats meat just as much a vegetarian as one who doesn’t?
Your answer will depend on what criteria you use: what someone SAYS they believe, or what they DO in practice of their beliefs.
To get to where the rubber meets the road, I’d ask you to consider a few additional questions: Is it just to judge any group by those who fail to live up to its tenets and principles? Is it helpful in any way? Will it forge bonds of understanding between neighbors? Will it make the world better and safer for anyone?
What ISIS thinks is irrelevant. What is relevant is what WE think and how we behave toward our Muslim family, friends, coworkers, colleagues, neighbors. What is relevant is what our Muslim neighbors think, and whether they care that the non-Muslims around them believe a vicious killer is as much an exemplar of his faith as one who lives a life dedicated to justice, kindness and inclusion.
Prior to the internet, Muslims received the teachings of Islam directly from clerics that guided their understanding of Islam. With the creation of the internet, we now have instant access to information from anywhere in the world with the exception of North Korea and the remotest jungle tribes. When this happened, discussions took place in Islamic forums requiring Islamic scholars to now answer very pointed questions. What is an Islamic scholar to do? They had no choice. They cannot deny the Quran and supporting hadiths and the internet made it very easy to question any milquetoast responses. The truth of Islam is now known to the majority of Muslims and they find themselves at a juncture of many paths: Accept the entire Quran, pick and choose what to believe and risk apostasy or abandon the faith. Although Islam has several sects, I am only concerned with the concepts that they are all in agreement with that demand our destruction of enslavement.
Here is a common belief that is global to all sects:
There are three dispositions for non-believers that are conquered or are governed by Islamic governments:
1, Convert to Islam
2. Do not convert but agree to be subjugated and pay jizyah tax
3. If the non believer refuses the first two options, they MUST be put to death
There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim according to the Quran. There is only Muslim.
There is no such thing as a fundamentalist or extremist Muslim for the same reason.
“Milestones” is an instructive book to read on this is by Islamic scholar Syyid Qutib regarding Islamic timelines and phases. This book was the most common found among dead and captured insurgents other than the Quran.
Click to access qutb-nilestone.pdf
I attend bible study with one notable convert that was and still is an Islamic scholar. He has enlightened me regarding the games many Islamic scholars play when answering the questions of non-believers.
I think it rational to suspect most Muslims have been in transition with most being peaceful. Until I see dangerous intent to take action, they will not be harmed as the odds are that they are not intent on violent jihad. This does not mean I am a fool. One only need to observe what is happening in Europe to note that there is a serious threat that places European citizens at great risk of sexual and physical violence. Even in the US, we have certain cities and towns that rather than assimilate, they are taking over city government and establishing Islamic communities that are increasingly hostile to free speech. This same thing has been going on in Europe for decades.
In reply to Maya:
Regarding the peaceful intent of Muhammad, consider the following:
“Kinana b. al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu al-Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, “Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?” he said Yes. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr b. al-Awwam, “Torture him until you extract what he has,” so he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud. (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, p. 515)”
The apostle in this verse is Muhammad himself.
“Quran (2:191-193) – “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]… but if desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.””
The Islamic definition of persecution is any action that prevents the global establishment of Islam. (And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah). To not allow the fulfillment of Islamic prophecy and beliefs by non-Islamic governments is considered persecution.
Many Muslims state truthfully that Islam is a religion of peace and they would be right when one considers what they mean by this: Life under sharia is peace. This is what they mean by religion of peace. Once common belief among ALL Islamic sects is that Islam MUST be established globally through governing sharia law. There is no room for other government systems in the end. They do address treatise with foreign governments, but this is just a phase until Islam is established globally and is not proof of Islams peaceful intent to coexist with other national governments.
There are words and then there are actions. Currently, I do not see Christians committing genocide but we do see ISIS wiping out Christians where they find them.
“What ISIS thinks is irrelevant.” I strongly disagree. Throughout history it has always been powerful minorities within a larger group that committed the worst atrocities leaving the majority as irrelevant. This is true regarding Islam and also Christianity if we consider the actions of the Jesuits during the inquisition. I warn not to make this same mistake with ISIS. What ISIS thinks is THE most relevant. I have not only read the Quran, but all hadiths and relevant Islamic scholarly works. It seems to me that you have read some of the Quran and have a woefully incomplete understanding to come to the conclusions you have and to make outrageous comparisons.
” You see your friend numerous times at Five Guys chowing down on burgers. What do you conclude? That some or all vegetarians eat meat? That vegetarians are liars? That “vegetarian” is a meaningless distinction? Or do you perhaps conclude that your friend only claims to be a vegetarian, but isn’t? ”
The comparison is not applicable to Islam. There is ample evidence to support a belief that there is a serious threat to non Muslims. Consider that there are just over 2 billion Muslims on the planet and some experts have published that of those 2 billion, about 15% are of the “extremist” variety. That is a global total of 300 million extremists. Even if it were only 7% that would be over 140 million. You go right ahead and trust what you feel is the peaceful positive intent of Muslims in general. I can tell you that even the peaceful Muslim communities are doing next to nothing to expose violent extremists in their midst.
I live in the San Bernardino area. The terrorist Syed Farook went to Sierra High School with my daughter. The FBI found data and drawings indicating that this high school and others were also targets of attack. You can go about your life thinking everything is fine, but I live in reality. No, not every Muslim on every block is a terrorist, but my situational awareness demands they be suspect until proven otherwise. It sucks, but they did this, not me.
My son in law’s Afghan interpreter is now here in the US. He is a Muslim, but more westernized. I have no problem with him or his family, but even he has told me to not trust fully fundamental Muslims as he can’t do so either. To them, he is an apostate due to his westernized ways. His parents are wealthy land owners in Afghanistan and he had to leave because he assisted the US armed forces or he would be killed just as his predecessor was.
You cite global “beliefs” of Islam that are not at all global. I don’t know where you got that idea, but those are NOT global Muslim beliefs and are not supported by the Qur’an any more than killing non-Christians is sanctioned by Christ’s out of context statement, “I have come not to bring peace, but a sword.” (Though it’s been used to justify intolerance toward non-Christians.)
You cited a partial verse from the second chapter of the Qur’an to support the idea that Muslims are supposed to kill non-Muslims. Possibly, ISIS uses it in the same way. Here’s the entire passage:
002.190-193 “Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.”
To sum up:
1. Don’t start hostilities—only fight when attacked.
2. Fight hard.
3. If the enemy stops fighting, you stop fighting and forgive them.
4. Show no hostility except against wrong-doers.
The entire second chapter of the Qur’an is dedicated to the Muslim community’s response to the persecution they endured at the hands of people they thought they could trust. Check the context: Muhammad is not talking about killing all non-believers, but fighting back against people who not only persecuted Muslims—even killing and driving out those among them who had converted to Islam—but did so after entering into a covenant with them.
Here’s the context from the same chapter of the Qur’an in which Muhammad describes the behavior of the people the Muslims were fighting:
002.027 “Those who break the covenant of Allah after ratifying it, and sever that which Allah ordered to be joined, and (who) make mischief in the earth: Those are they who are the losers.”
002.084-86 “And when We made with you a covenant (saying): Shed not the blood of your people nor turn (a party of) your people out of your dwellings. Then ye ratified (Our covenant) and ye were witnesses (thereto). Yet ye it is who slay each other and drive out a party of your people from their homes… Believe ye in part of the Scripture and disbelieve ye in part thereof? …Such are those who buy the life of the world at the price of the Hereafter.”
These are only two examples. There are more. These commandments were directed at a particular group of people who were abusing the Muslims in much the same way that ISIS is abusing its alleged enemies. Would you propose that it would be barbaric of our armed forces to kill ISIS operatives? Or to fight them until they stopped murdering innocent people? That to fight them makes us a violent people who believe in killing all non-Americans, or non-Christians or whatever group we consider our enemies?
The verse I cited in my original comment about small kindnesses is a teaching that prescribes a particular behavior to Muslims in daily life. Most of the Qur’an is composed of verses like that. Whereas the second Surih deals with a specific situation involving the “infidels” (literally meaning the “unfaithful”), these verses state core Muslim values,.
002.062 “Lo! Those who believe (in that which is revealed unto thee, Muhammad), and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabaeans – whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right – surely their reward is with their Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve.”
049.013 “O mankind! Lo! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware.”
005.008 “O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah.”
The conduct Muhammad references in verse 49:13 is laid out in the Qur’an and has nothing to do with killing non-believers. It deals with prayer, fasting and caring for the poor, with honesty, justice, mercy, kindness. Those are the values of Islam … and Christianity, and Judaism—of all revealed religion. Lest you think that only some Muslims twist the teachings of their faith toward violence, there are such ideologies in both Judaism and Christianity. There are, for example, revolutionary groups in Israel that have perpetrated attacks on Muslims and Christians, burning mosque and churches, and whose goal it is to overthrow the Israeli government and install a King who would return Israel to its Biblical values. There are Christian militias engaged in murderous campaigns in Africa countries.
It is neither helpful, nor just to spread the notion that all Muslims are mandated to kill all non-Muslims when nothing could be further from the truth. When it comes to groups like ISIS, we will only succeed in destroying them if non-Muslims stand in solidarity with Muslims who strive daily to follow the prescriptive teachings of their Prophet. If we fail to do this, we will succeed only in destroying ourselves and everything we claim to stand for.
“There are Christian militias engaged in murderous campaigns in Africa countries.”
By your logic, no there are not.
“Faith is as faith does. This is true of any philosophy or world view. Thus, it seems logical to me to identify members of a group by how well their attitudes and behaviors match up with a standard that they profess to hold in common—to judge them by their fruits, as Christ put it, not by their words alone.”
Christ would never tell his followers to engage in murderous campaigns. Therefore, those militias aren’t Christian.
Correct?
All the U.S. currency spent, pillaged in Afghanistan and we have Farkunda. I don’t know how to react to such barbarism. Daisy Cutter that shit. http://www.nytimes.com/video/world/asia/100000004108808/the-killing-of-farkhunda.html
You people are a bunch of ignorant assholes who only gain information from fear-mongering websites. This place reeks of the echo chamber for the bigots who don’t like actual facts.
Well, Fuck You, enlighten us with facts.