http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4013
<http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4013&search=arlandson>
&search=arlandson
 
Islam(ists) and religious world domination
November 14th, 2004
Islamic terrorism may eventually be defeated in its large manifestations,
like the one we saw on 9/11, but built into earliest Islam is an ultimate
goal of religious world domoination, whether carried out by violent or
peaceful means, as seen in the Quran, the Hadith (the record of the deeds
and sayings of Muhammad), and the sunna (the example or path of Muhammad).
Osama bin Laden and Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian who beheads innocent
workers in Iraq, are open about this goal, as we see in these fatwas,
statements, and interviews before and after 9/11.
In Osama’s August 1996 fatwa declaring war against the US, he claims
<http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html>  that
Islamic revival is occurring around world, and especially around the Muslim
world: 
Under the present circumstances [of Zionist-Crusader aggressions], and under
the banner of the blessed awakening which is sweeping the world in general
and the Islamic world in particular, I meet with you today.
In March 1997 Peter Arnett interviews
<http://www.robert-fisk.com/usama_interview_cnn.htm>  Osama, who says the
goal of jihad is to exalt God’s word [the Quran] to the heights, in other
words, until the message of his Holy Book goes around the world. 
For [subordination to the Jews and occupation of Arabia] and other acts of
aggression and injustice, we have declared jihad against the US, because in
our religion it is our duty to make jihad so that God’s word is the one
exalted to the heights and so that we drive the Americans away from all
Muslim countries.
His absurd goal of driving out Americans from all Islamic lands has been
answered here
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3737&search=Arlandso
n> . 
In May 1998 Jonathan Miller, then a reporter with ABC News, now a consultant
on terrorism for Los Angeles, interviews
<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/interview.html>
Osama, who believes that he is a servant of Allah and that his primary
mission is to spread by fighting the religion of light. 
I am one of the servants of Allah. We do our duty of fighting for the sake
of the religion of Allah. It is also our duty to send a call to all the
people of the world to enjoy this great light and to embrace Islam and
experience the happiness in Islam. Our primary mission is nothing but the
furthering of this religion. ...
In November 2001, after 9/11, Osama allows an interview
<http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/10/top1.htm>   with Hamid Mir, the editor of an
Arabic-language journal. The terrorist pulls back a little from his wish to
slaughter innocent people, though he has said in numerous other statements
and interviews that he is justified in doing so. His mission is to spread
the Quran:
Hamid Mir: Can it be said that you are against the American government, not
the American people? 
Osama: Yes! We are carrying on the mission of our Prophet, Muhammad (peace
be upon him). The mission is to spread the word of God, not to indulge [in]
massacring people.
In December 2001 Osama records a video
<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/589844/posts>  in which he and a
sheikh extol the 9/11 attacks. He states his goal clearly:
I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah,
and his prophet Muhammad.
In that same video Osama reports that after the attacks many converted to
Islam, and many others were at least curious about true Islam, in the sense
of possibly converting to it.
Some of them said that in Holland, at one of the centers, the number of
people who accepted Islam during the days that followed the operations were
more than the people who accepted Islam in the last eleven years. I heard
someone on Islamic radio who owns a school in America say: “We don’t have
time to keep up with the demands of those who are askingabout Islamic books
to learn about Islam.” This event made people think (about true Islam) which
benefited Islam greatly.
On September 11, 2004, the three-year anniversary of 9/11, al-Zarqawi
assumes <http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP78504>
that spreading Islam around the world is difficult, but that the holy
warriors should not give up:
As for you, fighters who came from afar, by Allah, missions of da’wa [the
propagation of Islam] have never been a road lined with roses and sweet
basil; the price of da’wa missions is heavy, and the price of bringing
principles to the land of reality is a lot of torn limbs and blood. The
light of dawn shall not be lit in this darkness save by Jihad fighters and
shahids. 
Thus, in the words of these two visible terrorists—and even non-violent
radicals and zealots agree, as we will see, below—the ultimate goal of Islam
is to spread the message and ways of Allah around the world because Islam is
the gift of God, the greatest seal and capstone of inferior Judaism and
Christianity. How is this goal best manifested and carried out? In following
the Quran and sharia (Islamic law), which expresses God’s will and ways in a
pristine form. Ultimately, violent and non-violent radicals want religious
world domination. 
Where do Osama and al-Zarqawi get this goal of spreading Islam around the
world? Out of thin air? Why do not Evangelical Christians use violence and
other extreme means to spread their message? After all, Christ said to go
into all the world and preach the gospel. What is the difference between the
two religions in their outlook and methods of promulgation?
As for Islam, the Quran states unequivocally the superiority and triumph of
Islam over all religions in three different verses: 61:9, 48:28, and 9:33.
We analyze these three verses methodically. First, it is better to use the
translations of Muslim scholars, not those of Western scholars, in order to
forestall the criticism of Western bias. Next, it is also crucial that we
analyze the historical context and the literary context of each verse. The
historical context reveals the occasion in which Muhammad received his
revelations—traditionally thought to be transmitted to him from God through
Gabriel. Sometimes this is difficult to discover, but not with these three
verses, fortunately. The literary or textual context is important because
other verses surrounding these three illuminate their meaning more clearly
than the three verses standing in isolation. Then, we interpret the import
of the verses, and finally we draw some inferences.
Quran 61:9 is analyzed first: 
Maulana Muhammad Ali is an apologist (defender) for Islam, more than an
objective scholar, and he translates as follows:
61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of
Truth that He may make it prevail over all religions, though the polytheists
are averse. (Maulana)
The following translation is approved and funded by the Saudi Royal family;
the parenthetical explanations are original:
61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the
religion of truth (Islamic monotheism) to make it victorious over all
(other) religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters,
and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and His Messenger Muhammad) hate
(it). (Hilali and Khan)
The word “religion” is really singular. And this translation by Majid
Fakhry, emeritus (retired) professor at the American University in Lebanon,
living now in the US, is approved by al-Azhar University, Egypt, the most
prestigious university in the Islamic world, and catches the meaning of the
singular:
61:9 It is He Who has sent His Messenger forth with the guidance and the
religion of truth, to make it triumph over every religion, even though the
idolaters may be averse. (Fakhry)
In many cases, it is a guessing game as to when in history a given sura
(chapter) or a passage within a sura was received from Gabriel, but 61:9 was
probably received one to three years after the Hijrah (Emigration from Mecca
to Medina in 622 AD). 
The title of the sura is “the Ranks,” which comes from 61:4:
61:4 Surely Allah loves those who fight in His ways in ranks, as if they
were a solid wall. (Maulana)
The historical context of 61:9, then, is battle and warfare. The verse may
refer to the Battle of Badr in 624 AD, in which the Muslims won a stunning
victory
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3710&search=Arlandso
n>  over a much-larger Meccan army, or it may refer to the Battle of Uhud
(625), in which the Muslims did not fare so well, but the loss did not hurt
them substantially, for they carried on and grew in power. It is likely that
61:9 was received after the Battle of Badr, for the verse sounds a note of
triumph, not defeat. Muhammad was flushed with victory, and in his
exuberance he foresees Islam overtaking Christianity, the largest competitor
religion in the Greater Middle East.
In fact, the verses just before 61:9—the literary context—show Jesus
prophesying the coming of a certain Ahmad, who is Muhammad (v. 6).
Disbelievers then accuse Muhammad of sorcery, impute falsehood to Allah, and
try to extinguish Allah’s Lights (vv. 7-8). Maulana Muhammad Ali in his
commentary sees these enemies as either polytheists or Christians whose
Trinitarianism is a version of polytheism. Thus, Muhammad the prophet is
breaking free from the inferior religion, Christianity (as well as Judaism).
And Jesus himself directly approves of Muhammad and the Quran as if to say
that Muhammad supercedes him. However, Muhammad provides no evidence that
Jesus says this; rather, Muhammad is just making it up, though claiming it
comes down from Gabriel.
The two conservative scholars working in Arabia, Drs. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din
Al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan, interpret 61:9 in a traditional way,
citing Imam Bukhari (810-870 AD), a scholar who collected the sayings and
deeds of Muhammad in the Hadith. His collection is considered completely
reliable and comes second in sacredness behind the Quran. Hilali and Khan
connect this hadith to 61:9:
Allah’s Messenger said: “By Him (Allah) in Whose Hand my soul is, surely the
son of Mary [Isa (Jesus)] will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims),
and will judge mankind justly by the Law of the Quran (as a just ruler) and
will break the Cross and kill pigs and abolish the Jizyah [a tax] . . . .”
Thus, Muslims believe that Christ will return as a Muslim, break the cross
in a symbolic display to show Christians how wrong they are, and kill pigs,
which are unclean animals to Muslims, but which Christians may eat. Indeed,
Muslims believe that Christ did not actually die on the cross, but another
man took his place. The odd belief of the non-crucifixion has been refuted
here
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3816&search=Arlandso
n> . 
Undeterred by the questionable, unresearched historicizing that denies the
crucifixion, Hilali and Khan themselves offer this warning to Christians,
based on Bukhari’s hadith:
[I]t is a severe warning to the Christians who claim to be the followers of
Isa (Jesus) and he will break the Cross and kill the pigs, and he will
abolish the Jizya (tax); and all mankind will be required to embrace Islam
with no alternative.
We can draw these inferences from the verse, its historical and literary
contexts, and its interpretation: (1) The triumph of Islam in 61:9 comes in
the context of warfare. Allah loves soldiers who win in ranks, and Islam
will triumph over all religions, but especially over heretical Christianity.
(2) Jesus himself prophesies and approves of Muhammad. The later Prophet
supercedes Jesus of Nazareth, whom Muslims regard as merely a prophet. (3)
Jesus is coming again, as Christians believe, but Jesus will be a leader of
the Muslims and will break the cross, which is based on the false doctrine
of the atoning work of Christ. (4) Terrorists use the idea of triumph over
other religions for their own diabolical purposes. This is especially
dangerous since this triumph is found in the context of warfare and
violence, according to Muhammad’s sunna or example in history.
The second passage is 48:28, and reads nearly identically to 61:9:
The two conservative scholars receiving Saudi support translate as follows:
48:28 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the
religion of truth (Islam), that He may make it (Islam) superior to all
religions. And All-Sufficient is Allah as a Witness. (Hilali and Khan,
parenthetical notes are theirs)
Majid Fakhry, instead of “superior,” uses “exalt it above”:
48:28 It is He Who sent His Messenger with the guidance and the religion of
truth, that He may exalt it above every other religion. Allah suffices as
Witness. (Fakhry)
Abdullah Yusuf Ali, a moderate scholar, has:
48:28 It is He Who has sent his Apostle with Guidance and the Religion of
Truth, to proclaim it over All Religion; and enough is God for a Witness.
(Yusuf Ali)
The historical context of Sura 48 takes place during the Treaty of
Hudaybiyah in 628. Muhammad had a dream, literally (see 48:27), to take a
pilgrimage to Mecca, but the Meccans blocked his way. After a standoff, both
sides agreed to a treaty by which Muhammad negotiated, among other terms,
the right to a pilgrimage to Mecca a year later in 629, which took place.
This truce won many new converts to Islam through peaceful means, not
warfare, and 48:28 indicates that Muhammad was so confident, he predicted
that his religion would spread out beyond Arabia and be exalted above other
religions.
However, warfare is near at hand in Sura 48, as usual in Muhammad’s career
and in Quranic verses, and this may have contributed to his confidence. In
628, after the Treaty, Muhammad advanced northwards and attacked the city of
Kaybar, where a rich tribe of Jews were settled. He was anxious to defeat
them because they were inciting enemies against him. But the Jews were
inciting enemies against him because he had exiled the Jewish tribe of
an-Nadir in 625. This is one more piece of evidence demonstrating how the
cycle of violence and revenge could go on and on in Arab culture; Muhammad
the God-inspired prophet did not rise above this violent cycle, but
skillfully used it to his advantage.
Be that as it may, Muhammad conquered the city and allowed the Jews to
cultivate their land, but they had to turn over half the produce to the 1600
Muslims who fought and took part in the attempted pilgrimage in 628 that
resulted in the Treaty. Indeed, the last line of 48:27 reads: “and He also
granted you a speedy triumph” (Haleem’s translation), and scholars agree
that this triumph or victory likely refers to Kaybar.
The literary context is revealing, as well. Allah promises Muhammad and his
fledgling religion more victories in Sura 48. For example, verse 22 says
that if anyone fights with Muhammad, the enemy will turn his back and run,
finding no protector or helper. Most importantly verses 24-26 predict that
the sacred Mosque (the Kabah shrine housing the sacred black stone in Mecca)
has been granted to Muhammad even before he actually takes possession of it.
Later, this will give Muhammad and his followers permission to claim
ownership over Jerusalem before they take possession of it, which will
generate many problems
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3727&search=Arlandso
n> , even today.
The interpretation of 48:28 should be anchored in the key words “superior,”
“above,” and “over,” depending on the translation. Allah’s true religion and
his guidance (the Quran) will be exalted over all other religions, which
echoes Osama’s belief that he must fight until God’s word is exalted to the
heights (see his interview in March 1997, above). 
Moreover, Yusuf Ali’s translation says that Islam should spread through
“proclamation,” a word choice that does not appear in other translations.
This is a peaceful (if inaccurate) rendering of the verse that Muslims
should consider as they spread their religion around the world, by
proclamation only. Yet, despite this soft translation, the historical
context and the overriding content of 48:28 spark a note of triumph in the
moderate scholar’s commentary on the verse. Says Yusuf Ali:
The divine disposition of events in the coming of Islam and its promulgation
by the holy Prophet are themselves evidence of the truth of Islam and its
all-reaching character; for there is nothing that it has not influenced.
This reasonable scholar, then, believes that the spread of Islam proves its
truth. Though this is a dubious inference, if a moderate holds to this, then
so will the terrorists. When they see Islam in recession compared with the
West and Christianity, they take action to stop the American “Crusaders.”
This belief drawn from early Islam has triggered the terrorist attacks for
the last twenty years, culminating in 9/11.
These inferences can be drawn: 
(1) 48:28 itself says that Islam would triumph over all other religions.
Osama understands the import of this verse, and desperately wants this to
occur, so he takes matters into his own hands and confronts the West,
especially the US, which, in his mental world, is a new Crusader. 
(2) Muhammad’s religion grew through peaceful means, the Treaty of
Hudaybiyah, but he could not leave well enough alone, and attacked a Jewish
settlement in Kaybar. 
(3) Therefore, warfare is close at hand in Muhammad’s prediction that Islam
would be exalted above and over all other religions. Facts like these
inspire terrorists and radicals to ensure the spread of Islam by whatever
means possible.
Quran 9:33 is the last verse:
Since this verse repeats the other two, we need use only one translation:
9:33 It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the
religion of truth, to make it superior over all religions, though the
Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of
Allah) hate (it). (Hilali and Khan, parenthetical notes are theirs)
The historical context of Sura 9 occurs late in Muhammad’s career, and most
scholars believe that this section where verse 33 is found reflects
Muhammad’s northward expansion without material and real provocation, as
reputable scholars agree, so Islam was acting aggressively. Specifically, in
October to December 630, after the conquest of Mecca in January 630,
Muhammad launched a Crusade to Tabuk, a city some 350 miles north of Medina
and 250 miles south of Jerusalem. “Crusade” is the right word, for early
Muslim sources say the army had 30,000 men and 10,000 horses, though modern
estimates agree that the numbers are exaggerated. Still, whatever the
specific number, the army was large.
On his way north, Muhammad extracted (or extorted, really)
agreements—without provocation—from smaller Christian Arab tribes to pay the
jizyah tax, instead of being attacked and killed. They also had the option
to convert, but most did not and agreed, rather, to pay the tax (see Quran
9:29, below). Once the Muslims reached Tabuk, the results were indecisive.
The Byzantine army failed to materialize, Muhammad and his large army
returned to their homes after ten days.
The verses around 9:33—the literary context—reveal an absolutist outlook,
which terrorists and non-violent extremists are quick to pick up on. Because
of Muhammad’s northward gaze, the polemics against Christianity becomes
harsher, as seen here:
9:29 Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last
Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger
(Muhammad), (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e.
Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) until they
pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Hilali
and Khan, parenthetical notes are theirs)
This verse, now famous or infamous, outlines four conditions for fighting,
notably the fourth one. Muslims are commanded to fight against the Jews and
Christians who do not acknowledge the religion of truth, Islam. The
Christians and Jews must submit after battle or avoid battle by paying a
special “protection” tax for the privilege of living under Islam, which was
moving northward without provocation. Incidentally, Muslim scholars, and
some Western ones, assert that, technically, this policy does not force
conversion. To a certain extent that is true, even though the technicality
has been called into question here
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3755&search=Arlandso
n> .  
Next, the following verse curses Christians who say the Messiah (no better
than a prophet in Islam) is the Son of God:
9:30 . . . [A]nd the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah. . . .
Allah’s Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth! (Hilali
and Khan)
Moreover, verses 31-32 and 34 claim that Jews and Christians take false
leaders to be their lords; that the Christians associate another god, Jesus,
with Allah; and that Jews and Christians want to extinguish the light of
Allah. Thus, Muhammad’s tone and language against Christianity (and Judaism)
become shrill.
The interpretation of 9:33 can be short, since it is nearly identical to
61:9 and 48:28. We need only add that Muhammad’s vision for a triumphant
Islam is repeated three times in the three verses, and his conquests in real
life and his vision work hand in glove. As his confidence grows, so does his
far-reaching vision of the superiority of his religion.
We can conclude from 9:33 and its historical and literary contexts, as
follows: 
(1) The largest, most powerful competitor religion was Christianity, and as
Muhammad confronts it, his rhetoric against it heats up. Islam is superior
to Christianity and will prevail over it. He is leading his Muslim soldiers
northward to expand the reach of Islam. Plainly said, this is a Muslim
Crusade long before the European Crusades. 
(2) Warfare and violence form the context of 9:33, especially 9:29, which
contains the word “fight,” which is directed against those who do not
believe in Allah, the End of Day, and Muhammad’s declarations on clean and
unclean things. But especially Muslims must fight against Jews and
Christians who do not submit or pay a tax. Why would not terrorists be
inspired by this command to fight and the ensuing violence? 
(3) In this northward march, Muhammad is outlining policies that his armies
of warriors must adopt and implement after he is gone (he dies in 632). From
Quran 9:29, later conquering Muslims adopt this policy: People of the Book
can fight and die or pay a “protection” tax or convert. In fact, the Muslims
are so successful militarily that they conquer Jerusalem in 638, dragging
this policy behind them. 
Contrasting Quran 61:9, 48:28, and 9:33 with Matthew 28:18-20:
We are now in a position to contrast Islam with another expansionist or
missionary religion, Christianity. Jesus in the last verses of the Gospel of
Matthew speaks what is known as the Great Commission, in which he
commissions his disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel and
make disciples. Evangelicals take these verses seriously.
28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on
earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
This passage can be contrasted with Quran 61:9, 48:28, and 9:33 in three
ways. 
First, Jesus does not announce the superiority of his new religion as
exalted over and above all other religions, even though he knows that the
greater Mediterranean world is filled with various religions—Greek and Roman
culture penetrated into Israel. It is true that he wants his message to go
out into all the world, and in this, Christianity is in conflict with Islam.
However, the tone and attitude in the Great Commission differs from
Muhammad’s tone and attitude in the three Quranic verses. No talk of winning
or superiority or prevailing can be found in Matthew 28:18-20.
Second, the historical and literary contexts in Matthew differ from that of
the Quranic passages. Jesus’ commissioning takes place after his
resurrection. In no way does warfare or conquest guide the Great Commission.
Jesus never raised an army to conquer Jerusalem or anything else. He did not
institute a policy that requires battle or “protection” tax or conversion.
And for the first three centuries his disciples followed this guidance
(Constantine comes in the fourth century). Christianity spread only by
peaceful proclamation. In contrast, Muhammad guides his followers in warfare
and conquest, and they follow him faithfully in this, for centuries. 
Third and finally, Jesus’ commissioning contains the bare minimum of
instructions. His missionaries are to preach, baptize, and make disciples so
that new converts obey all that he commands. But what are the greatest
commandments that take care of all the rest? 
After Jesus makes his Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (Matt 21:1-11) in order
to die there, not to conquer it, the Pharisees and Sadducees, two major
religious and political groups in first-century Israel, put him to the test
(21:23-27). He is questioned about political and religious matters, and he
answers them successfully (22:15-33). Then, one of them, an expert in the
law, tests him further.
22:35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36
“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied:
“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the
second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the law and the
Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Thus, Jesus does not reinstitute a new sacred law—sharia—that forbids or
allows this or that food or prayer method or forced fasts or animal
sacrifice or pilgrimage to a city or shrine. Those two commandments
summarize all of the Law and Prophets, and indeed are found in Leviticus
19:18 and Deuteronomy 6:5, and are repeated by the Apostle Paul in Romans
13:8-10. “. . . Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore, love is the
fulfillment of the law” (v. 10).
Muhammad, on the other hand, in 61:9, 48:28, and 9:33, proclaims that he has
received from on High “true guidance” which is another way of saying the
Quran, and it is filled with a new law of eating, forced praying, visiting
shrines, forced alms and fasts, conquering, and so on. For example, as we
have already seen in 9:29, Allah tells his prophet that he should fight
those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day or in what has been
forbidden, like eating pork, to cite one example. Also, Jews or Christians
who refuse to acknowledge the religion of truth, Islam, should be battled
and fought until they pay the “protection” tax with willing submission (the
word “islam” means “submission”) and feel themselves utterly subdued (beyond
submission), eventually having sharia imposed on them.
Christians, however, have been set free from onerous rules and regulations
in their eternal trip to heaven, thanks to Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.
(Yes, he physically, actually and historically died on the cross.) Why,
then, would Christians wish to submit—again, the key word in Islam—to a new
law that Muhammad adapted from the Old Law, 600 hundred years after Christ
lived and spoke those words of love and instituted a New Covenant of the
Spirit? Christians are commanded to go out into the world and preach the
love of God to all nations, not to fight and conquer unbelievers in all
nations, imposing a sharia or new law on them. 
We began this article with the very words of Osama bin Laden and Abu-Musab
al-Zarqawi who represent many other lesser-known terrorists. However, we
should not deceive ourselves that only terrorists believe their religion is
superior and will prevail over all other religions. Non-violent fanatics
have chimed in with shrill claims and predictions.
Sayyid Qutb, Egyptian novelist, poet and “activist,” executed in 1966 for
advocating the overthrow of the Egyptian government, claims
<http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2504>  that
Islam now must be chosen over Christianity: 
America and Russia are the same; they both base themselves on materialistic
thinking. The real struggle is between Islam on the one hand and Russia and
America on the other. Christianity is incapable of meeting the challenge.
That is why Islam must be chosen now.
In other words, the US and Russia are sinking into materialism, and Islam,
not Christianity, must fight the two countries because Christianity is too
weak spiritually. Thus, the “clash of civilizations,” though decried by
Westernized Muslim moderates seeking to put the best face on Islam, is still
a valid concept for more radical Muslims. Islam must dominate the world,
even if by “clashing.”
Next, a preacher at the Kaba Mosque in Medina, Sheikh Abd al-Aziz Qari,
delivers <http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2504>
a sermon predicting the annihilation of Christianity and Judaism, the
religions of unbelief—or of not believing in Allah: 
Two groups – the Jews and the Christians – are the main elements
constituting the Camp of Kufr [unbelief] and will continue to be its two
foundations until Allah allows their downfall and annihilation at the end of
days… 
Continuing his sermon, al-Aziz Qari repeats the hadith that says Jesus will
return and break the cross:
When the Prophet Muhammad was sent out, the Camp of Kufr declared war on his
message. At the center of this war were these groups, particularly the Jews.
These two groups will continue to serve as the grindstones of the conflict
and the war between belief and Kufr until eternity comes… The conflict will
end when Jesus the son of Mary, peace be upon him, arrives to break the
cross, and wipes it off the face of the earth, and kills the blind [false]
Messiah, the leader of the Jews and the tyrant whom they await. Until that
day, the conflict between us, the Muslims, and the Jews and Christians will
continue, and it will ebb and flow, one day ours, another day theirs….
Contrary to the sheikh’s revisionist assertion that the Camp of Kufr
(disbelief = Jews and Christians) declared war on Islam, it is more accurate
historically to say that when “Muhammad was sent out” (by Allah) on his
conquests in and around Medina and Mecca and even northward, he declared war
on surrounding tribes of polytheists and all the way to the Byzantine
Empire, which for the Prophet represented Christianity. Marching northward
with armies (not a band of preachers only), Muhammad launched his own
Crusades hundreds of years before Europeans launched theirs. 
Further, al-Aziz Qari distorts Christian eschatology (study of the end
times). Jesus will return, but in favor of the Muslims, arriving to
symbolically break the cross, in order to show how wrong Christians are. As
we noted earlier, though, Muhammad merely changes, without evidence,
Christian teaching to suit his own religion. But it is the Christians who
get to read the source documents—the New Testament—and interpret them;
Muhammad did not know them, but picked up what little he knew from fragments
of tales and apocrypha that circulated around the trade routes of Arabia.
Therefore, later Muslims do not have carte blanche to distort Christian
teaching, either. 
Be that as it may, al-Aziz Qari says that Islam will dominate the world, if
only when Jesus returns. Until then, conflict and war between the Camp of
Belief (Islam) and the Camp of Unbelief (Christianity and Judaism) will
never cease. Clearly, this sheikh’s rant and distortions are inspired by
early Islam.
Finally, in a sermon at the Old Mosque in al-Jumaa, Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abd
al-Majid ibn al-Aziz al-Deheishi predicts
<http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2504>  victory
for Islam as surely as the sun rises: 
He who doubts the victory of the [Islamic] religion is like he who despairs
that the sun will not rise after darkness falls… 
Taking his inspiration from early Islam, al-Aziz al-Deheishi cites as proof
for his prediction a hadith that says the rocks and trees will cry out that
there are Jews hiding behind them, and then will all the Jews be killed, and
finally Islam will be victorious (in bold print, below):
For the contemptible Jews … is foreseen an encounter with the nation of
Muhammad, as it is said: “The Day of Judgment will come, when the Muslims
will fight the Jews and kill them until the Jew hides behind the stone and
the tree. The stone and the tree will say: O Muslim, O worshipper of Allah,
there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him” – except for the gharqad
(thorny bush) tree, which is the tree of the Jews. These texts are certain
proof of the victory of the religion of Islam.
>From all of these quotations and from the commentary on the three Quranic
verses, it is evident that terrorists, extremists and even moderates believe
that Islam should be spreading not only in the Greater Middle East, but all
over the world. This has been seen in the comment of moderate Yusuf Ali that
the expansion of Islam amounts to God’s endorsement (see 48:28, above), and
in the claim of intellectual “activist” Qutb that the world must abandon
western Christianity (embodied in the US) and eastern Christianity (embodied
in the Russia). Islam must tackle materialistic America and Russia because
Christianity is too weak to do so.
Therefore, all these quotations and summaries of terrorists and non-violent
fanatics and even some moderates can be boiled down to this logic, which has
been explained in another analysis
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3597&search=Arlandso
n>  from another angle.
(1) If A, then B. If Islam is the superior religion (61:9, 48:28, 9:33),
then it must prevail and triumph over all other religions.(2) Not-B. But
Islam is not prevailing or triumphing over all other religions.(3)
Therefore, not-A. Islam is not the superior religion.
This logic is the terrible grievance that chafes at the heart of terrorists
and non-violent fanatics. 
All cultures and societies have some religion—ranging from simple animism
and ancestor veneration to Mahayana Buddhism and Hinduism—but it is only
Western civilization and Christianity, though not identical, that create the
negation in premise (2), the not-B, with some negation from Hindus in
northern India, bordering on Pakistan, and from animists and Christians in
Africa, who are being attacked and killed. Also, early Islam speaks almost
exclusively of Christianity as the major roadblock to world submission and
domination, and it is this major religion that Muhammad confronts in his
later unprovoked military campaigns. 
Therefore, the West and Christianity, though not identical, must be brought
down together, and earliest Islam inspires terrorists and extremists to
absorb this idea of triumph over the “Great Satan” and the “Camp of
Unbelievers” in their false religion, and to bring about the ultimate
victory for Islam the true religion by a variety of means, including holy
war in the example of their prophet.
Beyond the West, though, since all corners of the globe have some religion,
Islam must now religiously dominate the world, which entails complete
control over all aspects of society through sharia, with no distinction
between mosque and state, between religion and civil liberties, and between
imposing holiness from an antiquated and harsh law and choosing holiness
from a relationship with a loving Father God. 
Jim Arlandson (PhD) teaches introductory philosophy and world religions at a
college in southern California. He has written a book Women, Class and
Society in Early Christianity: Models from Luke-Acts (Hendrickson, 1997).
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to