DISCLAIMER: I present the following as questions, not conclusions. I have known a good number of Muslims in America and have found them, with few exceptions to be warm, friendly, peaceful individuals. The only exceptions I have found to this has been the racist Nation of Islam, which has historically espoused racial and violent teachings.
Another thread rose on the issue of the teachings of Islam. I found a differing view and wish to present it before you. I did not do so in response on the other thread simply because of its length. I do not wish for this thread to be a catalyst for hatred, anger, or bitterness, only for intelligent, genteel discussion.
This is not the entire article; in fact, the final point on this article was omitted, as it is basically a Christian evangelical piece. Much of the rest of the text of this piece was omitted as well, for the same reason. It is not my intent to proselytize on this thread, simply to challenge assertions being made. These challenges may be groundless; I hope for intelligent response to them. For those who desire to view it, this text may be viewed in its entirety at:
http://answering-islam.org.uk/TWOR/peacepromoting.html.
Now let us get on with our subject: DOES ISLAM PROMOTE PEACE? If so, what kind of peace? Recently, a Muslim young man gave me a pamphlet entitled "Islam Explained" (by the Islamic Circle of North America). It states that Islam "instructs people on how they may live together in peace and harmony regardless of race, class or beliefs." While I would agree that most Muslims are in favor of "peace and harmony regardless of race, class or beliefs", the question we want to answer is: Are Muslims for peace because of Islam or in spite of Islam? Does Islam itself promote peace and tolerance? Consider the following data ...
1. WHAT THE QUR’AN SAYS. The familiar term jihad, often translated holy war, literally means struggle. Many Muslims emphasize that jihad is about struggling against evil desires and, if necessary, defending one’s homeland and religious heritage. "Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors. Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is more grievous than bloodshed.... Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme." (Qur’an 2:190-192) [Note: Qur’anic quotes from N.J.Dawood’s English translation (The Koran, Penguin Books, UK, 1993)]. A favorite verse of moderate Muslims is 2:256 which says: "Let there be no compulsion in religion. True guidance is now distinct from error." Militant Muslims, however, will point you to numerous Qur’anic texts where Muhammad (as Allah’s spokesman) commands his followers to fight and subdue all who resist Islam. What leads young men to volunteer to die for the privilege of killing others "for the cause of Allah"? Could it have something to do with the fact that Islam offers no certain hope of heaven to any of its adherents, with one exception? Consider these few Qur’anic verses...
"As for those who are slain in the cause of God, He will not allow their works to perish. ... He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to them." (47:4-6)
"Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the hereafter, fight for the cause of God; whether he dies or triumphs, We shall richly reward him. ... The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan ..." (4:74,76)
"The believers who stay at home––apart from those that suffer a grave impediment––are not the equals of those who fight for the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God has given those that fight with their goods and their persons a higher rank than those who stay at home ..." (4:95,96)
"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. ... lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way ..." (9:5)
"Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter: except those that repent before you reduce them ..." (5:34,35)
"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme" (8:39)
"Prophet, rouse the faithful to arms. If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they shall vanquish two hundred; and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding." (8:65)
"Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given ... and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (9:29)
The Qur’an contains scores of similar verses.
Most Muslim Scholars see the world divided into two "houses"—the House of Peace (Dar Al-Salaam) and the House of War (Dar Al-Harb). The general idea is that Muslims belong to the House of Peace, while those who have not yet submitted to Islam belong to the House of War until they are "utterly subdued." However, even this distinction is often blurred since militant Muslims (who take the above verses at face value) also include moderate Muslims in the House of War. Consider further...
2. ISLAMIC NATIONS AROUND THE WORLD. The concept of jihad is rooted in another concept—Shari’a (Islamic law). Many of the world’s more than forty majority-Muslim countries have embraced Shari’a, and those that have not are under relentless pressure to do so. For example, over the past nine years in Algeria, some 100,000 Muslims have been slain by militant Muslims. The reason? These militant Muslims want political control of the nation. This is a growing trend in the Islamic world—even though it is a trend despised by most Muslims.
In the 94% Muslim country of Senegal (where freedom of religion is granted and Shari’a is refused), several Middle Eastern countries send over their Islamic teachers, build Islamic schools and finance more mosques in an effort to "purify" Senegal’s Islam. So what does "pure Islam" look like? Many Muslims will tell you that there is no country in the world that exemplifies true Islam. Yet Islam claims to be a religion that has the answers for society, a religion that offers peace and wholeness. So where should we look to get an example of what true Islam looks like? Iran? Afghanistan? Pakistan? Libya? Turkey? Indonesia? Egypt? How about Saudi Arabia?
While most Muslims decry the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as corrupt—it is nonetheless the "keeper of Islam" and the religious center toward which more than one billion Muslims face five times a day as they repeat their prayers in Arabic. In Saudi Arabia, freedom of religion is nonexistent. It is illegal to read a Bible or vocalize a non-Muslim prayer in the privacy of your own home. Under Islamic law, conversion to Christianity by a Saudi citizen is punishable by beheading. Saudi’s leaders do not support the idea that Islam "instructs people on how they may live together in peace and harmony regardless of race, class or beliefs." According to Amnesty International, the persecution of Christians in Saudi Arabia has "increased dramatically" since the Gulf War. More than a thousand cases have been documented in which Christian foreign workers have been arrested, imprisoned and/or beaten for participating in private worship meetings. Add to that the fact that numerous incidents go unreported, especially among Egyptians, Indians, Koreans, Filipinos and other Third World workers who fear further reprisals against them and their families.
A more moderate Islamic nation across the Red Sea from Saudi Arabia is Egypt. I recently met a family who has fled Egypt to seek asylum in the West. The reason? Constant harassment because of their religious beliefs. In Egypt, Christians can't even paint their walls or do minor repairs on their church buildings without a building permit—a permit that is virtually impossible to obtain. One particular woman had her identity papers confiscated and is being kept under house arrest—all because she left Islam to follow Christ. The charge of "denigrating Islam" is regularly leveled against Christians who are involved in leading a Muslim to Christ. Many Christians living in Upper Egypt have been pressured to pay "protection money" to Muslim racketeers. Those who refuse have been subjected to violent attacks. In October of 1995, Shehata Fawzi (a Christian farmer) was shot to death when he refused to pay 5000 Egyptian pounds to local Muslims. The Cairo-based center for Human Rights/Legal Aid reports the murder of dozens of Copts over the past several years. Last report, the government has failed to put a stop to it. Meanwhile, the militant Gama’a al-Ialamiya group wants to replace Egypt’s "moderate" government with a more strict Islamic state!
The harsh reality is that in every country where Shari’a is embraced, non-Muslims face restricted religious freedom and harassment—for nothing other than their religious beliefs. It should be said that there are times when governments, groups or individuals use Islam primarily as a pretext for carrying out their political-economic-cultural agenda. A horrifying example can be seen just south of Egypt—in central Sudan, where, since 1983, the Muslim government of Khartoum has exterminated more than two million Sudanese. Another five million have been displaced. Burning of villages and farms, slavery, rape, torture, forced Qur’anic indoctrination of children, and bombings of churches are regular events. Meanwhile, over in Indonesia, Laskar Jihad, a well-organized, well-funded, and well-armed Islamic militia has waged a campaign to annihilate the Christian population there. Over the past several years, thousands of Indonesians have been butchered for refusing to convert to Islam. If Islam is for "peace and harmony regardless of race, class or beliefs"—then where is the loud and clear, widespread outrage from the Muslim community over such carnage committed in the name of Allah?
Yes, accusations could be raised about horrible atrocities committed by many who have called themselves Christians (Crusades, Inquisition, slave trade, abortions, etc.). Yet, is there not a fundamental difference between the two? While the Bible clearly states that governments have a right to use the "sword" as "God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (Romans 13:4), the use of violence to further Christianity is in absolute opposition to the teaching and example of Jesus who prayed for those who crucified Him, "Father, forgive them..." (Luke 23:34). On the other hand, the use of aggression to further Islam is, at times, in apparent harmony with the teaching of the Qur’an (see above verses in the first point) and the example of Muhammad.
3. MUHAMMAD’S EXAMPLE. History tells us that, at first, Muhammad did not use force to induce the Jews, Christians and pagans to accept Islam. Later, however, when people and circumstances turned against him and when he began to gather an army to himself, he began telling his followers that the latest "revelations from Allah" were saying things like, "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (9:73) Thus began Muhammad’s career of warring in the name of Allah. Those defeated by Muhammad were offered protection if they would submit to the dictates of Islam. Those that refused to become Muslims had the "choice" either to pay tribute or to be put to death. This is the apparent "peace and tolerance" Muhammad offered to non-Muslims in his treaty with the people of Khaibar and to others. Non-Muslims were the Dhimmis (the people of obligation) and, as such, were to be "utterly subdued" (9:29).
About twenty years ago, a Muslim neighbor lent me his book on the life of Muhammad, hoping to attract me to Islam. Amid the many positive things recorded about Muhammad, one phrase that sticks with me to this day is that the Muslim author wrote that Muhammad could be both "compassionate and cruel." One of the better-known examples of Muhammad’s "cruel side" is recorded in several Hadiths, as well as in other writings such as the History of Tabari, Sirat Rasul Allah, and the Kitab Al Tabaqat Al Kabir ...
"A group of eight men from the tribe of 'Ukil came to the Prophet and then they found the climate of Medina unsuitable for them. So, they said, ‘O Allah's Apostle! Provide us with some milk.’ Allah's Apostle said, ‘I recommend that you should join the herd of camels.’ So they went and drank the urine and the milk of the camels (as a medicine) till they became healthy and fat. Then they killed the shepherd and drove away the camels, and they became unbelievers after they were Muslims. When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and they were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died." (Hadith, Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261: Narrated by Anas bin Malik.)
The oldest still-available biography of Muhammad is called the "Sirat Rasul Allah" ("Life of the Prophet of Allah"). This book was written by Ibn Ishaq a century before any of the major works of the Hadith. "Sirat Rasulallah" is considered the most authentic biography of Muhammad. On page 515, we read of an event that took place about three years before Muhammad's death. This specific narrative tells of Muhammad’s conquest of Khaibar, a large Jewish settlement with some of the best date palms in the region. The Jews of Khaibar were prosperous merchants, craftsmen, and farmers. Kinana al-Rabi, who was said to have had the custody of a certain hidden treasure, was brought to Muhammad who asked him about it. Kinana denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" he said "Yes." Muhammad gave orders that the ruin be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked Kinana about the rest of the treasure he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then Muhammad delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head. Were Muhammad’s actions in keeping with a religion that is for peace? And this is only one such example among many.
Friends, do not take my word on this. Do your own research. Take a look at the above-mentioned biography (English translation: "The Life of Muhammad" by A. Guillaume; Oxford Univ. Press) or "23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad" (by Ali Dashti; Mazda), or read some of the Hadiths. You will even read of instances in which Muhammad had innocent people put to death (such as Abu Afak, a 120-year-old man and Asma bint Marwan the mother of five children, a slave woman mother of two children, and the one-eye shepherd, all murdered while they slept. Their only crime was that they somehow offended "the prophet.")
I am keenly aware that such information is both painful and offensive for my dear Muslim friends. Yet truth is truth. Jesus didn’t beat around the bush when He said, "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles? Even so every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. ... False prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you before hand. ... Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch." (Injil, Matthew 7:15-17; 24:23,24; 15:14)
4. HISTORY OF ISLAMIC EXPANSION. Encarta Encyclopedia ‘99 says: "The remarkable speed of [Islam’s] religious expansion can be attributed to the fact that it was accomplished primarily through military conquest. Muhammad drew Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula to Islam by his forceful personality, the promise of salvation for those who died fighting for Islam, and the lure of fortune for those who succeeded in conquest. The caravan raids of the early years of Islam soon became full-scale wars, and empires and nations bowed to the power of this new religious, military, political, economic, and social phenomenon."
Yet in the booklet "The Basics of Islam at a Glance" prepared by The Islamic Cultural Center (Tempe, Arizona), we read: "There is no historical proof that Islam was ‘spread by the sword.’ Even non-Muslim scholars now admit that this is nothing more than a vicious myth which cannot be substantiated by historical fact." However, on an Islamic question-and-answer website we find a more honest assertion: "Question: Some enemies of the religion claim that Islam was spread by the sword. What is your response to that? Answer: Islam was spread by proof and evidence, in the case of those who listened to the message and responded to it. And it was spread by strength and the sword in the case of those who stubbornly resisted, until they had no choice and had to submit to the new reality." (www.islam-qa.com - question #5441)
Many say, "Well, what about Joshua and the Israelites? The Bible records that they exterminated entire cities of people!" True. But a close look reveals a quite different set of circumstances. Just as God (after hundreds of years of patient forbearance) had judged evil with a flood in Noah’s day, and fire from heaven on Sodom in Abraham’s day, so God used the people of Israel to judge the Canaanite nations. God waited hundreds of years before judging these nations, giving them time to repent and turn from their wicked ways of idolatry, immorality and human sacrifice. They ignored the witness of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Joseph, Moses and the ten plagues that came upon the Egyptians. Thus, God, at this particular time in history, used the Israelites to carry out His judgments. But please notice that this was no random warfare! These battles were carried out under specific commands from God with limitations. Sometimes God forbade the children of Israel to take any part of the spoil. The victories included miraculous interventions from God—such as Jericho’s wall falling outward (confirmed by archeology by the way) after the Israelites had marched around them on seven consecutive days. Notice also that God was fair and impartial in His judgments. For example, in the Torah, Numbers 25-31, we read how God first strikes the Israelites with a plague because of their idolatry and adultery. 24,000 Israelites die. Only after God had judged Israel does He send them forth to judge the surrounding nations.
Muhammad’s wars and later Islamic wars of expansion were very different from God’s acts of judgment as recorded in the Old Testament of the Bible. Muhammad would make treaties with the idolaters as long as he was still in the minority, but when he grew strong, he freely used the power of his human army—taking justice into his own hands. He gained great wealth from the war spoils. Muhammad’s wars were partial—always against non-Muslims, with little or no mercy—quite different from what we see a loving, long-suffering God doing through His prophets and chosen people under the Old Covenant. What’s more, Muhammad totally ignored the long-promised "New Covenant" which Jesus established and in which He commands His disciples: "Bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you. ... A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." (Injil, Matthew 5:44; John 13:34,35)
5. TREATMENT OF APOSTATES. Under Islamic law (based on the Qur’an, the example of Muhammad [sunna] and the consensus [idjmaa]), whoever falls away from faith in Islam commits an "unforgivable sin." Such "apostates" must be taken into custody by force, and called on to repent. He who does not turn back to Islam has, according to Shari’a, forfeited his life and is to be put to death by the state. While this is not carried out on a regular basis in most Islamic lands, the threat of it is there.
According to the daily paper, Al Alam, King Hassan II of Morocco, also the imam of his country, presented the following state of affairs before a human rights commission on May 15, 1990: "If a Muslim says, ‘I have embraced another religion instead of Islam,’ he—before he is called to repentance—will be brought before a group of medical specialists, so that they can examine him to see if he is still in his right mind. After he has then been called to repentance, but decides to hold fast to the testimony of another religion not coming from Allah—that is, not Islam—he will be judged."
It is no wonder that a major section of the Muslim population in majority-Muslim countries like Algeria, Egypt, Turkey, and Indonesia resists the full introduction of Shari’a. They do not wish to come under the frightening yoke of oppression which demands that thieves have their hands and feet amputated, adulterers be whipped, and converts to Christianity be killed. However, a significant minority of Muslims passionately demand the immediate adoption of Shari’a and are prepared, in some places, to fight for it with the help of terrorism and revolutions. In each Islamic country, militants and moderates wrestle over the Shari’a. Unquestionably, Islam is going through a global identity crisis—trying to define what it will become in the 21st century.
In pointing these things out, let me remind you that I am not blind to the madness of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, in which those who refused to submit to the "Church" were subsequently tortured and killed for their "apostasy". Once again, however, we must point out that this evil in Church history was in direct opposition to the law and spirit of Christ. Please keep this distinction in mind. In Jesus’ Parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15), the father did not have his rebellious son followed, locked up, tortured, starved or killed. He gave his son freedom to choose (and to suffer the natural consequences of his choices). While God has committed much authority to individuals and to governments, torturing or killing those who refuse to believe and obey God’s way of Salvation is NOT something He has asked man to do! Ultimately GOD will judge every person. "For it is written: ‘As I live, says the LORD, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God.’ So then each of us shall give account of himself to God." (Romans 14:11,12; Isaiah 45:21-23)
6. TREATMENT OF WOMEN. Our search for an answer to the question "Does Islam promote peace and tolerance?" would not be complete without at least mentioning Islam’s treatment of women. This is a subject which requires a very balanced approach. Many Muslims point to the extremes and licentiousness of women in the West as portrayed on television as proof that only Islam can put a stop to such permissiveness. This is because they do not know what the Gospel of Jesus Christ does in the life of those who believe. The loose women flaunted in movies do NOT reflect what a true Christian woman is like. If you know some true Christian women personally, then you know that such godly women are characterized by a desire to obey the Bible, which teaches "the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed." (Titus 2:4,5)
While the status of women varies greatly between Muslim countries, I highly recommend two insightful books, "Not Without My Daughter" (by Betty Mahmoody) and "Princess" (by Jean Sasson). The first book opens a window on the lives of women in Iran, the latter on those in Saudi Arabia. We have all been made aware recently of the extreme oppression of women in Afghanistan. Though the Taliban has been ousted, much of their strict legal code remains intact. While the vast majority of Muslims condemn the extremes of the Taliban, few are willing to speak out on behalf of the women in their own lands. Muslims have a very difficult time understanding a true Christian’s marriage relationship, in which the husband is the leader, but a servant-leader who loves his wife enough to put her needs before his own. The New Testament Scriptures teach that "husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church." (Eph 5:28,29) Meanwhile the Qur’an says,"As for those [wives] from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them." (4:34)
respectfully submitted,
Gideon MacLeish