Med red Morken i Iran - om huskirker og andre kirker og et presteskap som ikke finnes

 Iranske huskyrkjer er ikkje ulovlege og er ikkje ein trussel mot den nasjonale tryggleiken. Oppsiktsvekkjande nok er det dommarar i den iranske høgsteretten som slår fast dette.

 KRONIKK, her i utdrag, se Dagen tirsdag, 071221: : Johannes Morken, redaktør i Stefanusalliansen:

Iranske huskyrkjer er ikkje ulovlege og er ikkje ein trussel mot den nasjonale tryggleiken. Oppsiktsvekkjande nok er det dommarar i den iranske høgsteretten som slår fast dette.

 Kommentar: At huskirker ikke er ulovlig, kan bety at det ikke finnes noen konkret avfattet lov om at «huskirker» - spesifikt - ikke er lov i den «iranske grunnlov» med påfølgende sekulær lovgivning, i den grad en slik er tillatt og godkjent av de høyeste religiøse myndigheter i landet.

At det ikke finnes noen lov som forbyr huskirker, trenger ikke å bety noe annet enn at det ikke fins noen sekulær lov mot dem, som gjør dem ulovlige, et «lovfaktum» som da tillater, ja, påbyr, de sekulære myndighetene (som for eksempel politi) å stenge ned disse krikene, uansett om de betraktes som risiko for rikets- og religionens sikker eller ei.

Dette innebærer ikke at regimet anser diss «kirkene» for lovlige eller at de på den annen side ikke kan anse dem for å være ulovlige, på den måten islam forstår det. Det fins f eks heller ingen formelt vedtatt lov i Saudiarabia om at kristne og jøder ikke får lov til oppholde seg i riket, (annet enn på helt spesifikke grunnlag, dvs unntaksvis. Saudiarabia kan støtte seg på uttalelser fra profeten Muhammed på 600-tallet etter Kristus, uttalelser som i seg selv står over loven og må ha prioritet i alle sammenhenger).

Konklusjon: Slik Morken fremstiller det, villeder han folk til å tro at det iranske systemet er mer liket enn ulikt det systemet vi har her i landet, et land hvor islam ikke kan anses som noen rettskilde i judisielle avgjørelser. Han overfører sine egne, private forestillinger om hvordan rettssystemet i Iran er utformet og hvorfor det er utformet slik. Og så vil han at folk og lesere skal ha de samme mis-forestillinger og ikke bare forholdvis lett korrigere misoppfatninger.

I seg selv smaker dette av agenda, politisk agenda, vestre-agenda: Islam og muslimer skal vernes og det skal konstrueres verdier og forestillinger som gjør det letter å innbille folk og lesere at islam og det nå snart fullstendig sekulært gjennomsyrede samfunn vi nå en gang har, er mer likt islam enn ulikt islam. Det skal skapes forstillinger om at vi egentlig bygger på de samme humanistiske ideene som islam. Vi skal fores med eventyret om at både kristendom, jødedom og islam er såkalt Abrahamittiske religioner og at fred og fordragelig kan sikres på dette grunnlag – hvilket er en stor illusjon og en grådig vrangforestilling, et prosjekt som skal trekkes ned over hodene på folk nærmest subliminalt. Venstresiden gjør alt den kan for å ufarliggjøre islam og likestille islam med det fundament vi bare finner i den judeokristne tro og tradisjon.

Er Morken lar over at han lar seg bruke som en liten brikke i et mye større spill, som har vokst ham over hodet?

Når de «liberale» høyesterettsfommerne nå sier at det ikke finne noen lov mot huskirker, tenker mennesker i Vesten – hvis Morken skal få sin vilje, tror jeg – på at det finnes en analogi her til våre forskrifter, som er vedlegg til gjeldende positive lov og som forandres eller annuleres av den «byråkratiske» myndighet den sorterer under til enhver tid. Når vi kan forandre en forskrifter, kan iranerne og deres myndigheter forandre eller annullerer en lov (om huskirker). Slik vil mang kunne tenke idet man da danner seg nok et mentalt bilde der islam tros alt er mer lik oss og vårt system enn ulikt oss og vårt system. Men dette er selvsagt en illusjon og bygget kun på et fromt ønske, på servilt betinget emosjonell korrekthet.

Noen vil f eks også si og tenke at Iran som et muslimske samfunn var mye mer liberalt under Shaen, spesielt overfor kvinner, enn det regimet var og er under ajathollaene i næreste nåtid.

Man slutter: Ergo må islam egentlig være en liberal religion.

En slik logikk er katastrofal og direkte farlig. Morken ser ut til å være blant dem som går i fella.

For islam er fortsatt islam. De hellige tekstene ligger der; de kan ikke forandres; de kal alltid brukes og hentes opp igjen, ja, islam i seg selv betrakter det som forbilledelig og dermed et evig ideal for alle muslimer at de hentes opp igjen og anvendes her og nå, alltid. 

Se litt om hvordan loven og lovskolene fungere i islam:

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2020/04/om-opphr-av-pisking-karen-armstrong.html

Og se her en anmeldelse av en bok om islamsk juss og praksis, «Himmel på jord»:

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2019/02/himmel-pa-jord-i-henhold-til-islam.html

Morken: Ni kristne konvertittar som er dømde til fem års fengsel, tok sakene til Irans høgste domstol. Den 3. november kom konklusjonen. Dei skulle ikkje vore tiltalte for å handla mot nasjonal tryggleik.

Kommentar: Dette at huskirkene ikke kan betraktes som en fare for den nasjonale sikkerhet, betyr ikke at forbudet mot huskirkene i prinsippet strider mot islams guddommelige lov, slik denne flyter av islam og islams hellige skrifter og slik deler av islamsk juss flyter av vel etablerte og ubrytelig sedvaner, (i og med at Allah’s forordninger, bud, forbud ot tillatelser ikke kan endres eller suppleres av menneskeskapt, positiv, lov). 

 At de ikke skal betraktes som en far for rikets sikkerhet, er en helt annen sak. Morken ser ikke forskjellen og havner derfor i fristelsen for å bygge opp under illusjonen at rettssystemene i Iran og i Vesten bygger på samme fundament og grunnleggende juridisk forståelse. Morken forøker kanskje helt bevisst å forføre leseren nærmest på kommando av profeten selv og med de samme begrunnelsene. Det er som om han gjør seg til talerør for ayatollahenes fatwaer.

Huskyrkjene er ikkje illegale, skriver Morken. Jeg må bare vise til mine kommentarer over.

Morken trøster seg med at «Sakene må opp på nytt i revolusjonsdomstolen. Dei nye dommarane der kan følgja høgsterett, eller halda oppe dommane».

Kommentar: Her viser Morken at han ikke skjønner noe av hverken loven eller politikken i alt dette. Han er for naiv og vil at andre om mulig skal være enda mer naive. I praksis forklarer dette hans slik jeg ser det, paranoide eller fobe frykt for islamkrikk og saklige islamkritikere mer enn hans reelle frykt for islam, en frykt han bare kan rasjonalisere, fortrenge eller bortforklare og unnskylde, fordi han er en feig og servilt betinget emosjonelt korrekt fyr, en «little big man». 

Morken: Ein ankeprosess veit vi ikkje utfallet av. «Det er eit unikt signal frå den øvste domstolen. Men eg vil ikkje feira. Ei svale gjer ingen sommar. I seg sjølv er dette ikkje ei revolusjonær endring av regimet. Prosessen kan gå i mange retningar. I verste fall er vi om nokre månader tilbake til der vi er no», seier Mansour Borij i trusfridomsorganisasjon Article18 som kjempar for forfølgde iranske kristne.

Kommentar: Morken lar ikke Borij forklare hvorfor han er skeptisk til endringer. Grunnen er selvsat islam i seg selv, et poeng Morken ikke klarer å få med seg og vegrer seg mot at Borij får forklart. Det er simpelt gjort av Morgen mot Borij, i så fall.

Videre: Mange iranske konvertittar har møtt veggen i høgsterett. Men brått har nokre høgsterettsdommarar oppheva ni dommar. Dei seier at huskyrkjer «ikkje er ein manifestasjon av samling og samarbeid for å forstyrre landets tryggleik, internt eller eksternt».

Kommentar: Disse dommerne er plutselig blitt formalistiske. Hvorfor? foregår det en politisk dragkamp innad i det øverste samfunnslag? Er man uenig – politisk/religiøst - om hvordan Iran skal fremstille seg overfor utlandet og resten av verden?

Som det vil fremgå indirekte av mine kommentarer over, er dette bare formelle betraktninger, sett utenfra. Høyesterettsdommerne uttaler seg ikke mot islam, se over, de tolker lovene kun – strikt - formelt (men med store konsekvenser for de tiltalte, selvsagt). i praksis vet dommerne at huskirkene ikke utgjør noen nasjonal sikkerhetsrisiko, her brukt som en primært formell begrunnelse. Heller ikke de øverste imamene vil våre – rent politisk – å kalle huskirkene for en risiko for rikets sikkerhet – fordi dette blir for drøyt, eller dumt, til og med for imamene. En innrømmelse av at huskirkene skulle representere noen nasjonal sikkerhetsrisiko, ville betr å innrømme et nederlag for både høyesterettsdommere og imamer, og den «lovigivende forsamlingen» i landet, en forsamling som selvsagt aldri kan vedta noe lov som strider mot islam, både som religion og politikk. Å erklære at huskirkene skulle være en far for riktes sikkerhet, ville bety å innrømme eget nederlag, at ens politikk og styre egentlig var mislykket, at styret ikke lenger var i stand til å forsvære nettopp de islamske prinsippene, både politisk og religiøst.

Morken: Domstolen seier også at huskyrkjer ikkje er eit brot på artikkel 498 og 499 i den islamske straffelova. Paragrafane forbyr organisering av eller medlemskap i anti-statsgrupper. Huskyrkjene er heller ikkje i strid med andre kriminelle lover, seier dommarane.

Kommentar: Selvsagt. Dommerne tenker logisk. Men ikke logisk nok. Morken synes å mene at det er verdt å fortelle folk at det iranske styret ikke er så verst like vel. Det ligner vårt system! Det kan forandres! Men han kommer ikke bort fra det følgende, som han skriver:

«Mange huskyrkjer er blitt raida av det hemmelege politiet. Leiarar er blitt arresterte, utsette for psykisk turtur og fengsla. Mange er blitt overvaka. Pastorar og andre leiarar som er blitt truga med lange straffer, har valt å dra frå Iran. Under press frå det hemmelege politiet ville dei ikkje kunna driva kyrkje i Iran».

Kommentar: Morken er ikke interessert i å knytte raidene og arrestasjonene etc til noe som har med islam å gjøre. Han burde holde srge for god til dette vrengbildet han tegner, alle unnlatelsene. Morken har en klar agenda, og den er diktert av venstresiden, en venstreside som i iransk utforming ble gjort kål på, med massedrap på «venstrefolk», nettopp av imamene, med ajatholla Khomeini i spissen, han som sa at det ikke fins noen humor i islam, - en trossetning Morken ikke synes å tro på … 

Morken skriver: «Slike dommar er absurde prov på den massive undertrykkinga av religiøse minoritetar – som kristne konvertittar og bahaiar. Dommarane har første gong drege i alvorleg i tvil heile det juridiske grunnlaget for fengselsdommane mot konvertittane som no sonar».

Kommentar: Her røper Morken at han er nærmest grenseløst naiv, at han mangler kunnskaper om og innsikt i islam proper, eller han rett og slett ikke er i stand til, eller vil forstå alvoret.

Ifølge islam er disse lovene ikke absurde, dvs meningsløse, snarere tvert imot. (At visse formelle sider ved dommene og begrunnelsene, kan riktig nok diskuteres, på overflaten, men ikke islam som trossystem og overordnet rett).

Her forsvarer Morken for alle praktisk måter islam som sådan. Ren islam er på fremmarsj, med Morkens og høyesterettsdommere i Iran, i felles sak, på de samme barrikader. Sann islam skal nå vedtas ved positiv og menneskeskapt lov! Er ikke dette blasfemi?

Morken synes å være klar over en del av problematikken, men han tøtcher i sin «islamofobi» aldri på selve problemet: Islam. 

«I sommar blei den ultrakonservative Ebrahim Raisi vald til president, og mange frykta eit regime som ville stramma endå meir til. Kvifor skjer dette no, og kva ligg bak? Vi veit ikkje.

Somme spekulerer å at Iran – i ein svært krevjande økonomisk situasjon – vil betra omdømmet før nye forhandlingar med vesten.

Mansour Borij i Article18 viser også til ein modig kampanje som iranske konvertittar har reist i haust. Dei har utfordra regimet og kravd trygge stader å møtast til bøn og gudstenester. Article18, med støtte frå mellom andre Stefanusalliansen, tok i november kampanjen ut til eit endå breiare internasjonalt publikum.

«Dei modige konvertittane har ført situasjonen for iranske konvertittar høgare opp på den internasjonale dagsorden. Det kan ha gjort at regimet opplever at dei må betra omdømet sitt», seier Borij.

Men saka kan også handla om at dommarane i den aktuelle avdelinga av høgsterett avviser press frå tryggingspolitiet og etterretningsministeriet, seier Borij. «Desse dommarane seier det vi har sagt alltid, at konvertittane er uskuldige og aldri skulle vore dømde som ein trussel mot den nasjonale tryggleiken», legg han til.

Prosessen kan bli kronglete og lang. Dei nye dommarane i revolusjonsdomstolen som no skal gå gjennom sakene på nytt, kan følgja høgsteretten. Dersom dei derimot held oppe dommane, vil sakene sikkert bli anka. Dersom appelldomstolen også opprettheld dommane, kjem sakene på nytt til dei same dommarane i høgsteretten.

Dersom dei då held fast på at dei er ni kristne er dømde utan juridisk grunnlag, vil sakene truleg hamna i generalforsamlinga i høgsteretten: Leiarane av alle avdelingane i domstolen vil få dei ni sakene.

Denne store dommarbenken kan fella ein dom som berre gjeld dei ni. Eller dei kan skapa presedens for alle liknande saker, seier menneskerettsadvokat Hossein Ahmadiniaz. Det avheng av korleis dommarpanelet blir sett saman.

Den juridiske prosessen i Iran er annelis enn hos oss. Høgsterett i I Iran er ikkje det same som i Norge. vi dreg ingen konklusjonar førs site ord der sagt. Men viktig er det.

Under den silamske revilusjonen i 1979 fantes det knapt konvertittar i Iran. Men i dag er det kanskje ein milliion hemmelige kristne i landet.

Prestestyret ble redd for flukta frå islam. I 1210 kalla ayatollah Khameni huskyrkjnene for en «kritisk trussel». Same året blie den kjende pastoren Yousef Nadarkhamni dømt til døden for fråfall (apostasi).

Men tiltalen blei fråfallen og dødsdomen oppheva i 2012. Andre alvorlige tiltalepunkt har seinare rådd grunnen. Madar ble arrestrt igjen i 2016. Han er dømt som ein trussel mot nasjonal tryggleik og har sona sidan 2018.

Det var ein periode det straffene blei lengre og lengre, opp til 15 år. Interessant nok fekk Nadarkhani i sommar straffa redusert med frå 10 til seks år, med tillegg av to års indre eksil.

Så pass oppsiktsvekkjande er det som skjedde 3. november at det er grunn til å følgja nøye med på om livet for islamske konvertittar og huskyrkjer blir friare. Men prestestyret har lenge lært oss at det ikkje er nokon grunn til å feira for tidlige. (Dagen, tiorsdag 7. desember 2021, s 20 og 21).

Kommentar:

Vi ser her at Morken benytter seg av en tilsnikelse. En tidligere leder av Pakistan presiserte at det ikke finnes noe presteskap innen islam. Dette til tross, bruker vestlig «elite» konsekvent og som et en gang for alle opplest faktum at imamer er det samme som prester. Det er som om man vil hjelpe folk til å tro at islam er like «befenkt» som kristendommen med disse hersens prestene. Eller at: Se det, ja, dette viser jo på en positiv måte at islam og kristentro har den samme gud.

Hvilket bedrag! Og her bøyer Morken seg fromt for «folkemeningen», en folkemening som er opplært til å ta avstand fra alt som har med Gud å gjøre. Morken tenker som ateistene om islam og Gud! Man skulle kunne lure på om Morken faktisk er kristen, eller hva?

Se her: In Islam there is, technically, no priesthood, though there are local spiritual and community leaders, such as the imam, the mullah, the mufti, the qadi, and others.

priesthood | religion | Britannica

https://www.britannica.com › ... ›

For å si det kort: I den østlige kirken er presten først og fremst en karismatiker: Han ber Ånden – epiklesen - og komme ned over elementene i det vi kalle nattverden. I Vesten kom gjengivelsen av Jesu innstiftelsesord i fokus. Prestens oppgave eller fullmakt ble å forvandle brød og vin til Jesu legeme og blod.

Vi finner selvsagt intet av dette i islam. Snarere tvert imot. Når så prestene i Vesten begynte å tolke prestens oppgave eller rolle som en øversteprest som ofret opp elementene til Gud selv, ser vi at det er snakk om å ofre, som i en soningsofring – en helt uakseptabel tolkning innen islam.

Så hvorfor bruker Morken prest om imam og imam om prest?

Vet han ikke at Jesus er selve øverstepresten, som erlegger offeret en gang for alle? Og skjønner han ikke at det kan oppfattes svært krenkende for en kristen å kalle en imam en offer-prest, og like svært krenkende for en muslim å kalle en imam for sin offerprest eller enda mer, se og tro på Jesus som sin "paramounte" offerprest? 

Vi går videre:

The great Islamic scholar Ignaz Goldziher points out that while it was formulated by Shi’ites, “it is accepted as legitimate by other Muslims as well, on the authority of Qur’an 3:28.” Qur’an 3:28 warns believers not to take unbelievers as “friends or helpers,” “unless that you but guard yourselves against them.” This is a foundation of the idea that believers may legitimately deceive unbelievers when under pressure. The word used for “guard” in the Arabic is tuqatan, the verbal noun from taqiyyatan — hence the increasingly familiar term taqiyya.

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/10/france-imams-told-to-feign-support-for-the-french-after-beheading-of-teacher-for-showing-muhammad-cartoon

Islams vesen kommer godt frem – ifølge mange muslimer verden over, ja, hva annet kan de si og tenke, og handle på? - i følgende formulering:

KORANEN ER VÅR GRUNNLOV

PROFETEN ER VÅR LEDER

JIHAD  ER VÅR VEI

OG DØDEN VÅR ER VEIEN FREM …

Her det altså snakk om å ofre seg selv, ikke at noen har gått mellom og ofret seg en selv. Det fins også tekster i islam som gjør det lovlig for muslimer å ofre sine barn i visse situasjoner. Martyrene har et privilegium fremfor alle andre muslimer: Han eller hun går dirkete inn i den allahiasnke himmelen, og havner da på øverste hylle der …

Fra den islamske trosbekjennelsen og utledet av Koranen selv og som derfor står evig fast og uforanderlig:  

Led oss på den rette vei - deres vei, som Du har beredt,

ikke deres, som har vakt Din vrede,

eller deres, som har valgt den falske vei.

 (Merk: Riktig fromme muslimer skal fremsi denne befalingen, bønnen eller appellen 17 ganger i døgnet). Se her og se her: Jihad - har vi fått nok av det?

When Germany allows public broadcasts the Islamic call to prayer, what exactly is it allowing? The adhan, prayed in Arabic, goes like this:

Allah is greater (Allahu akbar); intoned four times.

I testify that there is no God but Allah (Ashhadu anna la ila ill Allah); intoned twice.

I testify that Mohammed is Allah’s Prophet (Ashhadu anna Muhammadan rasul Allah); intoned twice.

Come to prayer (Hayya alas salah); intoned twice.

Come to security/salvation (Hayya alal falah); intoned twice.

Allah is greater (Allahu akbar); intoned twice.

There is no God but Allah (La ilah ill Allah); intoned once.

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2021/04/om-en-formaning-om-be-for-alle-verdens.html

Læresetningen: ”bila kaufa wale tashbih” betyr: Uten å spørre om hvorfor og uten å foreta noen sammenligning, et dogme som den største delen av den muslimske teologi i sitt leie er bundet av til dags dato. https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2019/08/6-synden-og-syndene-i-islam-og.html

Jihad fi sabil Allah - Jurister mener at det ikke påhviler den enkelte muslim å kjempe med sverdet, (fard ayn), men en kollektiv plikt, (fard al-kifa) og som skulle iverksettes på Allah’s måte, (fi sabil Allah) se Himmel på jord . Se også: Utvik: Jihadistene … utgjør et svært lite mindretall … å beskrive dem som terrorister, er som å kalle europeiske sosialister på syttitallet terrorister … der hvor den muslimske befolkning har fått sitt land okkupert av en ikke-muslimsk makt, vil man gjerne omtale motstandskampen som en jihad fi sabil Allah, en kamp for Guds sak.  Ateismen og drømmeren Utvik

Sure 3. 104 – dere skal forordne det som er godt og forby det onde (mange oversettelser)

Sure 3. 110 – dere er det beste folket (mange nyanser),

Omar ibn al-Khattab sier selv i tolkningen av dette: ‘’Å’ alle mennesker. Den som liker å være en del av dette folket (‘’det beste folk’’) må oppfylle Allahs krav av å være det.’’

https://omsjia.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/koranen-sier-sahaba-er-det-beste-folk/

«For Hans vilje står absolutt over all lovs løfter”.

s 84 Ashari: ” … vi tror at godt og ondt er utkommet av Allah’s dekret og forutbestemmelse (qada’wa qadar) … og at skapningene ikke er i stand til verken å berike seg eller skade seg selv uten Allah”.

Al islam huwa deen wa dawla – islam is a religion and a state, Qutb

Islam huwa awsa’ mina al deen islamai – islam is wider than than Islamic religion; Qaradawi sier “it’s a whole integrated system, nazamon kamle wa mutakamel s 78

Al intikhabat sharr, wal ahzab shar: bin Laden og Zawahiri: Election are evil and parties are evil, s 73

Allah, khalikul el mamalut, la yujaaldal – One cannot argue with Allah s 70

La taadud fil islam – no plurality in islam

Al tafseer al islami kamel – the islamic explanation is perfect s 69

al walaa wal baraa: Sannheten er at hat har en så sentral plass i islam at det har fått sitt eget navn, al walaa wal baraa. Dette reflekterer alle muslimers religiøse plikt til å hate det Allah hater. Allah sier (hvis man skal tro koranen), at han hater nordmenn, fordi vi ikke er muslimer.  

https://www.sian.no/artikkel/islam-er-ikke-velkommen-pa-furuset

Description:

Al-wala' wa-l-bara' is referred to as holding fast to all that is pleasing to God, and withdrawing from and opposing all that is displeasing to Allah, for the sake of Allah. This is for their calling towards something other than submission to Allah, whether on purpose or by nature of disbelief. Loving for the sake of Allah means to love Allah and to show loyalty to him by following his Shariah. It means to love all that is good and permissible in the Quran and Sunnah. This type of love requires one to defend Allah's deen and to preserve it. It is to love those who are obedient to Allah and to defend and assist them. Hating for the sake of Allah signifies showing anger towards those who oppose Allah, His messenger, His deen, and the believers.^[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Wala%27_wal-Bara%27

Al-Walaa literally means loyalty, to support, and to follow. In the context of Islam, al-Walaa becomes loyalty to Allah ﷻ and whatever He is pleased with, as well as friendship and closeness with fellow believers. It is to totally agree with the sayings, deeds, and beliefs that please Allah ﷻ and the people He ﷻ is pleased with.

After loving Allah ﷻ and His Messenger ﷺ, Allah obligates us to love those who love Him and His Messenger ﷺ and the Islamic aqeedah (creed) obligates every Muslim to love the people of tawhid (faith in One God). This manifests in kindness towards the believers, giving them the benefit of the doubt, and supporting them in Allah’s cause as described in the Qur’an:

And the believing men and the believing women are friends and allies to each other. [9:71]

Al–Baraa, on the other hand, linguistically refers to the opposite: to desert, to detach ourselves, to keep innocent of, and thus contextually means to disagree with everything that Allah ﷻ dislikes and condemns. It is to free ourselves from whatever is displeasing to our Lord, being innocent of all that Allah ﷻ tells us to avoid, out of our own desire to reach a level of closeness to Him.

https://qarawiyyinproject.co/2017/06/11/walaa-baraa-loyalty-in-islam/

Se og hør på denne, og forstå om du kan det inn over deg:

Al maot fi sabeel al jihad – promote death in jihad as the ultimate value

Naasbaq’ul maout kama taasbaqun al hayat – we are in love with death

Al-jihad fi sabeel Allah – constant effort on behalf of Allah

Fatwa, sing, Fatawa, pl  – et rettslig påbud som ikke er en lov, og bare bindende for den som utferdiger den, og for den som godtar hans taqlid, dvs hans stilltiende aksept.

Opinion on the point of law given by a jurist, faqih kalt mufti: In the medieval period he had no excecutive power; If two muftis consulted by a qadi on a question of the application of religious law, sharia, offered opposing advice, the qadi would choose the solution that he thought best. En fatwa I Iran kan utstedes av ayatollahen.

NB: hisba    hisba-klausul – enhver muslim kan reise sak mot en annen hvis han mener samfunnet er truet eller religionen stilles i miskreditt

Om "Assuan" - og muslimsk rett og makt:

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2019/04/muhammed-den-samme-i-gar-i-dag-og-i.html

Dualisme, Warner:

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2011/02/hvorfor-det-er-umulig-reformere-islam.html

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2017/05/dd-over-jdene-igjen.html

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2020/10/islamske-angrep-pa-vesten-fra-632-til.html

Morken, i Vietnam, om jødene fra Koranen:

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2020/10/med-morken-i-vietnam-nok-en-begredelig.html

Adonis, volden I islam:

https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2021/02/nrk-aftenposten-rasisme-og-israel-og.html

Hva sier Allah’s ord om jøder:

The Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the well-being of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); claiming that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); loving to listen to lies (5:41); disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13); disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more.

moske preken i montreal jw spencer

Hva Koranen bl a sier om kristne:

The Qu'ran's Descriptions of Commonalities With Christians

Several different passages in the Quran speak with respect to the commonalities Muslims share with Christians.

"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians—whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses).

". . . and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" (5:82).

"O you who believe! Be helpers of God—as Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, 'Who will be my helpers in (the work of) God?' Said the disciples, 'We are God's helpers!' Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved. But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed" (61:14).

The Qu'ran's Warnings Regarding Christianity

The Qu'ran also has several passages expressing concern for the Christian practice of worshipping Jesus Christ as God. It is the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity that most disturbs Muslims. To Muslims, the worship of any historical figure as God himself is a sacrilege and heresy. 

"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).

"Oh People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God anything but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a messenger of God, and His Word which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. Say not, 'Trinity.' Desist! It will be better for you, for God is One God, Glory be to Him! (Far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs" (4:171).

"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is but a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them; how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of God, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary. Yet they were commanded to worship but One God: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him! (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)" (9:30-31).

Og hva sier Koranen om Israel: The Zionist Quran, By Editorial Team

IQ al Rasooli:

Most Muslims have absolutely no idea what Muhammad’s Quran reveals, since its contents is a jumble of disconnected, non-sequential thoughts, ideas and stories.

The BDS (Boycott Disinvestment & Sanctions) movement against Israel was started by the Arabs and has chapters in many countries in the world, supported invariably by clueless indigenous members of these countries who claim that they are not being anti Jewish but rather, are fair minded regarding the alleged oppression of the ‘Palestinian People’ by Israelis.

The so called “Palestinians” (who are actually Arabs and Muslims from all over the Middle East and Central Asia) claim with incredible degrees of historical and theological contortions and deception, that the Jews are occupiers of their Arab land. This, in absolute and in obvious contradiction of the Bible, not to mention Muhammad’s Quran and the historical record.

The Arabs and their supporters never mention the following facts:

Arab imperialism conquered and subjugated the Holy Land in 635AD and remained as occupiers for 1330 years (until 1967)

The Balfour Declaration addressed the territories that today make up Jordan, Israel and Palestinian Authority. The British, without the consent of the Jews or the League of Nations, unilaterally gave Jordan to the Hashemite Arabs. Thus the Jews lost almost 72% of the land promised to them at the stroke of a pen

There was a “Two-States” UN resolution (181) in 1947 which was accepted by the Jews but rejected by the Arabs.

In 1948 the Arabs started a war of extermination against the newly created Israel (in territories allocated to them by the UN).

The war resulted in alleged 700,000 Arab refugees and a cessation of hostilities in 1949.

Because of the Arab war against Israel and the Jews, there was a mass expulsion of over 950,000 Jews from the lands of their nativity by Arab and Muslim countries

Had the Arabs not started the war against the Jews, there would have been no Arab or Jewish refugees

What people don’t know, including many Muslims themselves, is that the Quran is actually quite a pro-Zionist document. By which I mean that Allah, in the Quran, asserts repeatedly and unambiguously that the Promised Land belongs only to the descendants of Abraham, through the bloodlines of Jacob-Israel and Isaac called Israelites, the Chosen People.

To the Arabs and Muslims, calling Quran Zionist is tantamount to blasphemy.  But is it though?

Let me explore this issue based entirely upon Muhammad’s Quran itself and no other. A simple review of the relevant verses of the Quran provide all the necessary evidence.

Those who want the complete verses, can read them in the Quran, as I am giving you chapter and verse where to find them. It is important to understand that Allah, and no one else, is speaking these words in these verses and Muslims (and Arabs) all over the world have been defying and disobeying their god Allah’s commands and statements with impunity and without reverence:

Al Baqara 2:47 – “O Children of Israel! call to mind the (special) favor which I (Allah) bestowed upon You and that I preferred you above the whole world “

Al Baqara 2:122 – “O Children of Israel! call to mind the special favor which I bestowed upon you and that I preferred you above the whole world”

Al Maida 5:21 – “O my people! enter the holy land (al-Ard al-Muqaddasa) which Allah hath assigned unto you and turn not back ignominiously for then will ye be overthrown to your own ruin.”

Al Aaraf 7:137 – “And We (Allah) made a people considered weak (and of no account) inheritors of lands in both east and west lands, whereon We sent down our blessings. The fair promise of the Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel, because they had patience and constancy and We leveled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride)”

(“inheritors of lands in both east and west lands” is actually the Promised Land of the Israelites on BOTH sides of the river Jordan).

Al Aaraf 7:138 – “We took the Children of Israel (with safety) across the sea…”

Yunus 10:93 – “We settled the Children of Israel in a beautiful dwelling-place and provided for them sustenance of the best”

Al Israa 17:2 – “We (Allah) gave Moses the Book (Torah) and made it a Guide to the Children of Israel (commanding): “Take not other than Me as Disposer of (your) affairs.”

Al Israa 17:104 – “And We (Allah) said thereafter to the Children of Israel “Dwell securely in the land (of promise)”:

Ta Ha 20:80 – “O ye Children of Israel! We delivered you from your enemy and We made a Covenant with you on the side of Mount (Sinai) and We sent down to you Manna and quails…”

Al Mu’min 40:53 – “We did aforetime give Moses the (Book of) Guidance and We gave the Book (Torah) in inheritance to the Children of Israel”

Al Dukhan 44:32 – “And We chose them (People of Israel) aforetime above all the nations knowingly”

Al Jathiyah 45:16 – “We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book (Torah) …  and We favored them above all the nations”

Allah, in very clear Arabic, asserts that he fulfilled his promise to reward the Children of Israel with the Promised Land, the same land that the later conquering hordes of Muhammadan Arabs claim as exclusively theirs, contrary to their own Quran.

Allah, in verse after verse and in different chapters, repeatedly and unambiguously asserts that it was Allah and only Allah who did the “choosing”, contrary to the hate-mongering declarations by anti Jews that it is the racist and arrogant Israelites and Jews who declare themselves the Chosen People.

Based upon all that has been presented here, how can any sane and fair minded person accept the wild and unsubstantiated claims by Muslims, that the loose leaf and arbitrary collection of the Quran is correct, whereas the older Book, the Torah of the Bible, whose pages, chapters and verses are in perfect order and upon which the Quran’s foundations are rooted, is not?

It is obvious that Muhammad did not realize that his loose-leaf notes had fully captured and preserved – though somewhat scrambled up from the more ancient accounts – actually verifying with detailed explanation, that the Israelites and the Jews had lived many centuries before him, settled and made their homeland as a nation in the very state of modern Israel and territories that have since been restored. These are the very lands that his Arab followers absurdly deny had ever previously belonged to anyone else but themselves.

It is crystal clear, that contrary to the untested beliefs of hundreds of millions of Muhammadan Arabs and Muslims in the world today, their very own Quran in fact, fully supports and verifies the claims of the Jews for the land of Israel as their ancient and rightful home and nation.

Thus, in a nutshell, the Quran is Zionist.

IQ al Rassooli is an authority on the subjects of Islam, Arab – Islamic history and the Arab – Israeli conflict. You can follow him on his blog  www.Inthenameofallah.org

Se denne artige her, en artighet som kanskje ikke så artig, like vel?:

Muslims love Jesus, too: 6 things you didn’t know about Jesus in Islam

Muslims don’t believe Jesus was the son of God, but they do revere him as a holy prophet.

By Jennifer Williams@jenn_ruth Updated Dec 20, 2019, 1:01pm EST

Muslim women take a selfie in front of a Christian manger displayed in front of the Church of the Nativity in the West Bank town of Bethlehem on December 18, 2014. Thomas Coex/AFP via Getty Images

Christmas, as everyone knows, commemorates the birth of Jesus and is a major religious celebration for Christians around the world.

But what many people don’t know is that Jesus is an important figure in Islam, too, even though most Muslims don’t celebrate Christmas as a religious holiday. (But some, especially some American Muslims, do celebrate it for cultural reasons!)

In honor of the holiday, here are six things you may not know about the role of Jesus — and his mother, Mary — in Islam:

1. Jesus, Mary, and the angel Gabriel are all prominent characters in the Qur’an (as are Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and a bunch of other Bible characters).
2. Muslims believe that Jesus (called “Isa” in Arabic) was a prophet of God and was born to a virgin (Mary). They also believe he will return to Earth before the Day of Judgment to restore justice and defeat al-Masih ad-Dajjal, or “the false messiah” — also known as the Antichrist. All of this may sound pretty familiar to many Christians. (The fact that Muslims know that “al-Masih ad-Dajjal” is the Arabic name for the Antichrist created some...uh...unexpected problems for Netflix recently — warning: spoilers.)
3. Mary (called “Maryam” in Arabic) has an entire chapter in the Qur’an named for her — the only chapter in the Qur’an named for a female figure. In fact, Mary is the only woman to be mentioned by name in the entire Qur’an. As noted in the Study Quran, “other female figures are identified only by their relation to others, such as the wife of Adam and the mother of Moses, or by their title, such as the Queen of Sheba.” Mary is mentioned more times in the Qur’an than in the entire New Testament of the Bible.
4. Just as they do with all the other prophets, including Mohammed, devout Muslims recite “peace be upon him” after every time they refer to Jesus by name.
5. Muslims believe that Jesus performed miracles: The Qur’an discusses several of Jesus’s miracles, including giving sight to the blind, healing lepers, raising the dead, and breathing life into clay birds.
6. The story of Jesus’s birth as told in the Qur’an is also the story of his first miracle, when he spoke as an infant in the cradle and declared himself to be a prophet of God. Here’s the story:

And remember Mary in the Book, when she withdrew from her family to an eastern place. And she veiled herself from them. Then We [God] sent unto her Our Spirit [the angel Gabriel], and it assumed for her the likeness of a perfect man. She said, “I seek refuge from thee in the Compassionate [i.e., God], if you are reverent!” He said, “I am but a messenger of thy Lord, to bestow upon thee a pure boy.”

She said, “How shall I have a boy when no man has touched me, nor have I been unchaste?” He said, “Thus shall it be. Thy Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me.’” And [it is thus] that We might make him a sign unto mankind, and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter decreed.

So she conceived him and withdrew with him to a place far off. And the pangs of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a date palm. She said, “Would that I had died before this and was a thing forgotten, utterly forgotten!” So he called out to her from below her, “Grieve not! Thy Lord has placed a rivulet beneath thee. And shake toward thyself the trunk of the date palm; fresh, ripe dates shall fall upon thee. So eat and drink and cool thine eye. And if thou seest any human being, say, ‘Verily I have vowed a fast unto the Compassionate, so I shall not speak this day to any man.’”

Then she came with him [the infant Jesus] unto her people, carrying him. They said, “O Mary! Thou hast brought an amazing thing! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not an evil man, nor was thy mother unchaste.” Then she pointed to him [Jesus]. They said, “How shall we speak to one who is yet a child in the cradle?”

He [Jesus] said, “Truly I am a servant of God. He has given me the Book and made me a prophet. He has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined upon me prayer and almsgiving so long as I live, and [has made me] dutiful toward my mother. And He has not made me domineering, wretched. Peace be upon me the day I was born, the day I die, and the day I am raised alive!”

That is Jesus son of Mary— a statement of the truth, which they doubt.

So although Muslims do not believe that Jesus is the son of God — a critically important distinction between Muslim and Christian views of him — Muslims do revere Jesus as an important prophet.

Merry Christmas!

https://www.vox.com/2017/12/18/10660648/jesus-in-islam-muslims-believe-christmas-quran

Og her følger … :

Quran is the only non-Christian Scripture that makes Jesus and mother Mary as an article of faith. No Muslim is a Muslim until he believes and witnesses that Jesus was one of the great prophet of God and was born miraculously without a father from the blessed mother Mary.

Quran asked the followers of Islam to declare that they (Muslims) believe the truth of what was revealed to Jesus and Moses. Quran further asked the followers of Islam to declare that they (Muslims) do not discriminate among the messengers of Almighty God (3:84).

Quran is the only non-Christian Scripture that has a complete chapter in the name of mother Mary (Maryam chapter 19) and declared mother Mary, a pure/pious woman and a woman who was chosen and raised above all the women of the world (3:42) and Quran further declared her a truthful woman who never deviated from the truth (5:75). Quran represents mother Mary as an example who guarded her chastity, believed in her Lord’s Words and His Books, and a devoutly obedient woman (66:12). According to Quran God promised mother Mary a son who will be highly distinguished in the world and near to God (3:45). According to Quran God exalted the followers of Jesus over those who deny Jesus till day of judgement (3:55).

To prove the birth of Jesus without father Quran present the similitude of the birth of Adam. If God can create Adam without mother and father then that God is totally capable of creating Jesus without a father (3:59).

According to Quran Jesus Christ (pbuh i.e Peace Be Upon Him) was obedient messenger of God and Jesus was given a book. (19:30) In Quran, God says Isa, the son of Maryam (Jesus, the son of Mary) was sent with clear signs and God helped him with the Holy Spirit (Angel Gabriel) (2:253). According to Quran Jesus was righteous like other prophets (6:85). Quran says that Jesus Christ was sent with wisdom and clear evidences for the clarification over which the people used to differ (43:63).

Jesus Christ was blessed by God and was ordered to pray and give charities (19:31). According to Quran Jesus Christ was blessed for whole of his life from the day he was born till the day he dies and Jesus Christ shall be blessed when he will be raised back to life again (19:33). Jesus Christ was kind to his mother and he was not a rebellious or defiant or domineering or haughty or arrogant person (19:32).

Quran recognizes the miracles of Jesus like speaking from the cradle, giving life to dead, curing blindness and leprosy and making a living bird out of clay. According to Quran all these miracles were shown through Jesus by permission of God. According to Quran Jesus was a man of wisdom and had comprehensive understanding of Torah and Injeel (Gospel) (5:110).

According to Quran God made ‘Isa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), and his mother HIS (God’s) miraculous sign and God provided them a comfortable and facilitated abode on a pleasant, elevated ground fit for living with ease and comfort, and there was flowing water (i.e., streams, waterfalls and springs—a feast) for sight (23:50).

Quran declared Jesus as one of the great prophet and God says in Quran, We took a covenant from the Prophets (to preach faith) and from you (Mohammad pbuh) and from Nuh (Noah pbuh) and from Ibrahim (Abraham pbuh) and Musa (Moses pbuh) and ‘Isa (Jesus pbuh), the son of Mayam (Mary), and We took from them a solemn covenant (33:7).

According to Quran Christians are gracious and possess a sense of affection towards those who believe. Quran further says that there are priests and monks among them and Christians are not arrogant (5:82).

According to Quran Jesus was not God himself rather he was one of the messengers of God (5:75). According to Quran God will ask Jesus on the day of judgement did you say to people to Worship you and your mother as gods instead God? And Jesus will reply in negative (5:116). Quran says God is all powerful has control over the lives of Jesus, mother Mary and all other human beings on earth and God has the power to destroy them all (5:17).

According to Quran Jesus Christ was neither killed nor crucified and those who claim that Jesus was crucified are making assumptions without any knowledge and evidence (4:157).

According to Quran Christians started worshipping their monks and even Jesus Christ although they were commanded to worship only one true God (9:31). Quran says Christians have forgotten a large portion of their commandments and in punishment of that God broke them into different sects who hate each other till the day of Judgement (5:14)

https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-Quran-say-about-Christianity

Stefano Scata/Getty Image, By Huda, Updated on December 23, 2018:

In these contentious times of conflict between the world's great religions, many Christians believe Muslims hold the Christian faith in derision if not outright hostility.

However, this isn't the case. Islam and Christianity actually have a great deal in common, including some of the same prophets. Islam, for example, believes Jesus is a messenger of God and that He was born to the Virgin Mary—beliefs surprisingly similar to Christian doctrine.

There are, of course, important differences between the faiths, but for Christians first learning about Islam, or Muslims being introduced to Christianity, there is often a good deal of surprise at just how much the two important faiths share. 

A clue to what Islam really believes about Christianity can be found by examining Islam's holy book, the Qu'ran.

In the Qu'ran, Christians are often referred to as among the "People of the Book," meaning the people who have received and believed in revelations from God's prophets. The Qu'ran contains verses that highlight the commonalities between Christians and Muslims but contains other verses warning Christians against sliding toward polytheism due to their worship of Jesus Christ as God. 

The Qu'ran's Descriptions of Commonalities With Christians

Several different passages in the Quran speak with respect to the commonalities Muslims share with Christians.

"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians—whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses).

". . . and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" (5:82).

"O you who believe! Be helpers of God—as Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, 'Who will be my helpers in (the work of) God?' Said the disciples, 'We are God's helpers!' Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved. But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed" (61:14).

The Qu'ran's Warnings Regarding Christianity

The Qu'ran also has several passages expressing concern for the Christian practice of worshipping Jesus Christ as God. It is the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity that most disturbs Muslims. To Muslims, the worship of any historical figure as God himself is a sacrilege and heresy. 

"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).

"Oh People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God anything but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a messenger of God, and His Word which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. Say not, 'Trinity.' Desist! It will be better for you, for God is One God, Glory be to Him! (Far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs" (4:171).

"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is but a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them; how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of God, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary. Yet they were commanded to worship but One God: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him! (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)" (9:30-31).

https://www.learnreligions.com/what-does-the-quran-say-about-christians-2003785

A look at Islam’s holy book, the Quran, may qualify the vehement displays of innocence. The following verses are cases in point:

Quran (9:29): “Fight against Christians and Jews until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.”

Quran (5:51): “Don’t take Jews or Christians for friends. If you do, then Allah will consider you to be one of them.”

Quran (2:65-66): “Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers.”

Quran (5:51): “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”

Quran (9:30): "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Anyone who takes time to actually read the Quran before stipulating what Islam is or is not will find that similar verses abound; militant groups readily cite these verses to legitimize their actions. In other words, the anti-Christian and anti-Jewish verses of the Quran have direct implications on how jihadists think and behave. Arguing, therefore, that Islam has little to do with atrocities committed in its name is simply unconvincing.

The problem, in fact, goes beyond sporadic outbursts of anti-Christian violence in the Arab world, to everyday discrimination. In constitutions of Arab countries, the first article typically stipulates that Islam is the religion of the state. This remains true even in a country like Egypt, where millions of Christian Egyptians live.

Because Arab Christians are politically irrelevant, Western powers ignore their plight. But the (much ignored) fact remains that Arab Christians live as second-tier citizens in their own countries.

Think of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood declaring that Christians (and women) cannot become president of Egypt. Think, in fact, of Mahdi Akef, a senior figure of the Muslim Brotherhood, maintaining that a non-Egyptian Muslim can become president of Egypt, but not an Egyptian Christian. Or think of allowing Muslim men to marry Christian women, but not the other way around.

Think, also, of the hurdles Egyptian Christians face each time they want to build a new church, or restore an old one. The list is long. If we ponder the plight of Christians living in the Arab world, it becomes clear that ISIS treatment of Iraqi Christians is not a drastic break with their lot in the region. What ISIS does is simply push an already existing bias into its extreme end – just like the Nazis did with anti-Semitism.

The ethos that surrounds Arab Christians is discriminatory. This ethos rests on a certain understanding of Islam, just like the anti-Semitism of old was informed by a certain understanding of Christianity. As long as a drastic reinterpretation of Islam is missing, the fate of Arab Christians will continue to be grim.

This is precisely why the “Islam is blameless” theory is both misleading and counterproductive; it delays the much-needed soul searching that Muslims need to engage in, for their own sake and that of others. And while Islamophobia should never be condoned – because it is as shameful as the discrimination Arab Christians suffer – the “Islamophobic” smokescreen should not be thrown at anyone arguing that the roots of the problem go well beyond ISIS alone. For this is a mere fact. 

Hicham Bou Nassif is finishing his PhD in political science at Indiana University this year. He will join Carleton College, Minnesota, as Assistant Professor in the political science department in August 2014.

The Qur'an: Israel Is Not for the Jews, Claims to the Holy Land, by Robert Spencer
Middle East Quarterly, 2009:
Editors' preface: Who has rights to the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River? Zionists cite biblical passages in which God awarded them Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel, in perpetuity in his covenant with the children of Israel. Muslims make a counter-claim based in part on verses of the Qur'an that describe the Jews in terms of contempt and in part on rulings in Muslim law that reject Muslims relinquishing rule over a territory under Muslim rule to nonbelievers. But other Muslims cite different Qur'anic verses in support of the Jewish claim. The conflict has a religious quality that makes it the more difficult to resolve.

The Middle East Quarterly commissioned two essays presenting different views of the Qur'an and its passages dealing with the Holy Land and Jews. The first author, Robert Spencer, argues that Islamic law has not recognized and will never recognize Jewish rights to this territory. In a second essay, Muhammad Al-Hussaini, a Muslim scholar, understands the text of the Qur'an to award the Holy Land to the Jews for all time, and he holds that Muslims can be convinced of this interpretation.

The status of Israel has become a pivotal issue in all talks about the Middle East. Israel's legitimacy rests, not just on United Nations resolutions or Zionist aspirations, but, for many, on Biblical narratives and the historical connections of Jews with the Holy Land. A minority of Muslims find justification for the Zionist enterprise equally in the Bible and the Qur'an and believe that the Qur'an offers divine sanction for the establishment of a Jewish state in southern Syria. However, the majority cite other Qur'anic verses and passages from the Hadith (purported records of the Prophet Muhammad's actions and sayings), stating the exact opposite. This second, negative attitude toward Jews is expressed in sacred texts and in the body of Shari'a (Islamic law) where Jews, like all non-Muslims, are assigned a status that does not permit their becoming rulers over Muslims or over Muslim territory.

Traditionally, this has not been an issue. Under the different Muslim empires, Jews were kept firmly in their place and represented no sort of threat to the ruling order. It is only in the modern period that this has become a burning issue. Thus, the transition from the Ottoman Empire to the British Mandate to modern Israel has been as much a religious as a political clash. The Arab onslaught of 1948 was religiously motivated, as is modern opposition to Israel by Islamist groups.

The Hamas charter asserts that "the Islamic Resistance Movement [i.e. Hamas] regards Palestine as an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future generations until Judgment Day." A waqf is a religious endowment bestowed by God. Consequently, "neither it, nor any part of it, should be squandered: Neither it, nor any part of it, should be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Muslim generations until Judgment Day."[1]

The charter is not unique: It represents a mainstream view among Muslims today. In contrast, several Muslim spokesmen have recently claimed that the Qur'an promises Israel to the Jews and that the claims of Hamas, Hezbollah, and allied groups are illegitimate on Islamic grounds.[2] This is a comforting message, which some of these spokesmen have taken to Jewish audiences, reinforcing the idea that the Islamic jihad imperative against Israel is simply the province of a tiny minority of extremists and that the voices of reason, moderation, and Qur'anic authenticity will eventually prevail.

Muhammad al-Hussaini's Liberal Stance

Among these scholars is British-based imam Sheikh Muhammad Al-Hussaini, who asserts that early Muslim intellectuals recognized that Israel belonged to the Jews. "You will find very clearly that the traditional commentators from the eighth and ninth century onwards have uniformly interpreted the Koran to say explicitly that Eretz Yisrael [Heb. The Land of Israel] has been given by God to the Jewish people as a perpetual convenant [sic]. There is no Islamic counterclaim to the Land anywhere in the traditional corpus of commentary."[3]

Although an extremely comforting message to supporters of Israel, it is not true and is based on a partial and inaccurate reading of the Qur'an.

Hussaini bases his argument primarily upon Qur'an 5:21 in which Moses declares: "O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has prescribed for you, and turn not back in your traces, to turn about losers."[4] He then cites the classic Qur'an commentator Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (838-923), who explains that this statement is "a narrative from God … concerning the saying of Moses … to his community from among the children of Israel and his order to them according to the order of God to him, ordering them to enter the holy land."[5]

Tabari is not unique in this. Another respected Muslim exegete, Ibn Kathir (1301-73), says about Qur'an 5:21 that the Jews "were the best among the people of their time. ... God states next that Moses encouraged the children of Israel to perform jihad and enter Jerusalem, which was under their control during the time of their father Jacob. Jacob and his children later moved with his household to Egypt during the time of Prophet Joseph. His offspring remained in Egypt until their exodus with Moses. They found a mighty, strong people in Jerusalem who had previously taken it over. Moses, God's Messenger, ordered the children of Israel to enter Jerusalem and fight their enemy, and he promised them victory and triumph over the mighty people if they did so."[6]

But that is not the end of the story. Ibn Kathir then says that the Jews "declined, rebelled, and defied his order and were punished for forty years by being lost, wandering in the land, uncertain of where they should go. This was their punishment for defying God's command." In contrast, "The Muslim Ummah [community] is more respected and honored before God, and has a more perfect legislative code and system of life, it has the most honorable Prophet, the larger kingdom, more provisions, wealth and children, a larger domain and more lasting glory than the children of Israel."[7]

The idea that the "glory" of the children of Israel was not lasting explains why Hussaini's exegesis is incomplete. He quotes Tabari, saying that God wanted the children of Israel to enter the Holy Land but stops short at the rest of what the Qur'an says about them. But he argues that this promise is lasting, basing his comments on the nature of the Qur'an itself as understood in traditional Islamic theology: "It was never the case during the early period of Islam … that there was any kind of sacerdotal attachment to Jerusalem as a territorial claim. Jerusalem is holy but Mount Sinai is more holy. Sinai is mentioned far more often, and Jerusalem isn't actually mentioned [in the Qur'an] by name."[8]

If this exegesis is correct, why does the Islamic world from Morocco to Indonesia manifest such hostility to Israel? Why have so few Muslims noticed that God wants the Jews to possess the Holy Land? One answer is that Hussaini's primary authority, Tabari, has more to say about the Jews. Qur'an 2:61 says of some Jews who rebelled against Moses that "abasement and poverty were pitched upon them, and they were laden with the burden of God's anger; that, because they had disbelieved the signs of God and slain the Prophets unrightfully; that, because they disobeyed, and were transgressors." Qur'an 9:29 directs Muslims to "[f]ight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden—such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book—until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled." "Those who have been given the Book" is the Qur'anic term for Jews and Christians, and the tribute (jizya) is a poll tax levied upon the People of the Book in an Islamic state. Tabari discusses 2:61 in the context of 9:29, emphasizing that this tax was meant to be humiliating:

Abasement and poverty were imposed and laid down upon them, as when someone says "the imam imposed the poll tax (jizya) … on non-Muslim subjects," or "The man imposed land tax on his slave," meaning thereby that he obliged him [to pay] it … God commanded His believing servants not to give them [i.e., non-Muslims] security—as long as they continued to disbelieve in Him and his Messenger—unless they pay the poll tax to them.[9]

Conversion or Submission of Jews

The principle that Muslims must not give the Jews security unless they convert to Islam or pay the jizya directly contradicts Hussaini's assertion that they were to possess the land forever. A people that may never have security unless it converts or submits to the rule of others cannot have a land to rule by itself. The idea that "good Jews" are those who convert to Islam is deeply rooted in Islamic tradition. In the 1970s, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, currently the grand sheikh of Cairo's Al-Azhar University and the leading authority for Sunni Muslims today, wrote a 700-page treatise, Jews in the Qur'an and the Traditions, in which he concluded:

[The] Qur'an describes the Jews with their own particular degenerate characteristics, i.e. killing the prophets of Allah, corrupting His words by putting them in the wrong places, consuming the people's wealth frivolously, refusing to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness … only a minority of the Jews keep their word. … [A]ll Jews are not the same. The good ones become Muslims, the bad ones do not.[10]

The Jews and Christians who do not believe in Muhammad as a prophet will find that "shame is pitched over them (like a tent) wherever they are found, except when under a covenant (of protection) from Allah and from men."[11] This probably refers to the dhimma, the contract of protection under which Jews and Christians live as subject peoples under Islamic rule. However, even if one understands it to refer to the covenant that God made with the Jews to give them the Land of Israel, the Qur'an also says that they broke their contract:

So for their breaking their compact we cursed them and made their hearts hard, they perverted words from their meanings; and they have forgotten a portion of that they were reminded of; and thou wilt never cease to light upon some act of treachery on their part, except a few of them. Yet pardon them, and forgive; surely God loves the good-doers.[12]

Being thus accursed, the Jews are not the legitimate heirs of the promise made in Qur'an 5:21. The true heirs are those who have remained faithful to God (i.e., the Muslims), not those whom he has cursed (i.e., the Jews). Even this is not the full extent of Qur'anic anti-Semitism. The Muslim holy book contains many passages that form the foundation for hatred of Jews that exists independently of the actions of contemporary Jews or the State of Israel. The Qur'an portrays the Jews as the craftiest, most persistent, and most implacable enemies of the Muslims.

The Qur'an is supplemented by the Hadith, purported records of the Prophet Muhammad's actions and sayings. Some hadith predict that at the end of the world, in the words of Ibn Kathir, "the Jews will support the Dajjal (false messiah), and the Muslims, along with 'Isa [Jesus], son of Mary, will kill the Jews."[13] The idea that the end times will be marked by Muslims killing Jews comes from Muhammad himself, who said, according to a hadith, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say: 'O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.'"[14]

This hadith is a favorite motif among contemporary jihadists. On March 30, 2007, Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan said on Palestinian Authority television:

The Hour [resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the rock and the tree will say: "Oh, Muslim, servant of God, there is a Jew behind me, kill him!

Continuation of Qur'anic Anti-Semitism

A vivid illustration of the Qur'an's enmity toward the Jews and how contemporary Islamic spokesmen echo it, came in 2004 from Islam Online, a website founded by the internationally influential Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Although Qaradawi has won praise from Islamic studies professor John Esposito for engaging in a "reformist interpretation of Islam and its relationship to democracy, pluralism, and human rights," that reformist impulse does not carry over to Qaradawi's view of Jews (he has justified suicide bombings against Israeli civilians), or the anti-Semitism he has allowed to be published on Islam Online.[15]

In 2004, the site posted an article entitled, "Jews as Depicted in the Qur'an," in which Sheikh 'Atiyah Saqr, former head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University and Seminary in Cairo, depicts Jews in a chillingly negative light, illustrated with quotations from the Qur'an.[16] Among other charges he levels at the Jews, Saqr says that they "used to fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to God"; they "love to listen to lies"; they disobey God and ignore his commands; they wish "evil for people" and try to "mislead them"; and they "feel pain to see others in happiness and are gleeful when others are afflicted with a calamity."^[17]

Though he offers many examples of the alleged evil traits of the Jews supported by the Qur'an, Saqr does not mention the notorious Qur'anic passages that depict an angry God transforming Jews into apes and pigs. The first of these depicts God telling the Jews who "transgressed the Sabbath … Be you apes, miserably slinking!" It goes on to say that these accursed ones serve "as a punishment exemplary for all the former times and for the latter."[18]

The implication is that today's Jews are bestial in character and are the enemies of God, just as the Sabbath-breakers were. Tantawi has called Jews "the enemies of Allah, descendants of apes and pigs."[19] Saudi sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Sudayyis, imam of the principal mosque in the holiest city in Islam, the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, has said in a sermon that Jews are "the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs."[20]

Yet Hussaini actually asserts that the Muslims who oppose his perspective have no Qur'anic case, asserting that "no fundamentalist, no matter how hard they try, can overrule the existing tradition to say there is, in fact, an Islamic counterclaim to Eretz Yisrael."[21] The Qur'anic evidence above explains why mainstream Muslim voices and prominent Muslim leaders never invoke Qur'an 5:21 to argue that Muslims ought not to be waging jihad against Israel. This is simply not a mainstream view or one that most of those who are familiar with the totality of the Qur'an would ever advance. It gives Jews and all supporters of Israel hope, yes, but only a false hope.

Muslims can get beyond anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism only by forthrightly acknowledging that the Qur'an and Sunna do, indeed, teach that the Jews are accursed and are to be warred against. Muslims must explicitly formulate theological frameworks that reject literalism in this regard. To deny that the Qur'anic evidence actually says what it does, however, is only to allow the endemic and pandemic problem of Islamic anti-Semitism to continue unchallenged.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (Regnery, 2005) and The Truth About Muhammad (Regnery, 2006).

[1] "The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas)," Aug. 18, 1988.
[2] See, for example, Abdul Hadi Palazzi, "What the Qur'an Really Says," Viewpoint, Winter 1998; Jamie Glazov, "The Koran and the Jews," interview with Khaleel Mohammed, FrontPageMagazine.com, June 3, 2004.
[3] Simon Rocker, "What the Koran Says about the Land of Israel," The Jewish Chronicle, Mar. 19, 2009.
[4] All translations of the Qur'an from A.J. Arberry, ed., The Koran (London: Allen and Unwin, 1955, subsequently Oxford University Press).
[5] Rocker, "What the Koran Says about the Land of Israel."
[6] Ibn Kathir, Tafsir Ibn Kathir (abridged), vol. 3 (London: Darussalam, 2000), pp. 142-3.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Rocker, "What the Koran Says about the Land of Israel."
[9] Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism (Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus, 2008), p. 35.
[10] Ibid., p. 33.
[11] Qur'an 3:112.
[12] Qur'an 5:13.
[13] Muhammed Ibn Ismaiel al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari: The Translation of the Meanings, vol. 4, book 56, Muhammad M. Khan, trans. (Houston: Darussalam, 1997), no. 2925.
[14] Ibid.
[15] John Esposito, "Practice and Theory: A Response to 'Islam and the Challenge of Democracy,'" Boston Review, Apr./May 2003; "Al-Qaradawi full transcript," BBC News, July 8, 2004.
[16] Qur'an 3:75; 5:64; 3:181; 5:41; 5:13; 2:109; 3:120; 2:61; 2:74; 2:100; 59:13-4; 2:96; 2:79.
[17] Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Special Dispatch, no. 691, Apr. 6, 2004.
[18] Qur'an 2:63-6; 5:59-60; 7:166.
[19] MEMRI, Special Report, no. 11, Nov. 1, 2002.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Rocker, "What the Koran Says about the Land of Israel."

https://www.meforum.org/2462/the-quran-israel-not-for-jews