Google the phrase “Muslim violence,” and more than 29 million entries pop up. Granted, some of these citations represent violence committed against Muslims, but, unfortunately, quite a few represent violence committed in the name of Islam.
Google the phrase “Muslim violence,” and more than 29 million entries pop up. Granted, some of these citations represent violence committed against Muslims, but, unfortunately, quite a few represent violence committed in the name of Islam.
This makes me wonder: What does Islam really stand for? I hear a great deal about Muslims who do not believe in violence. Yet, it seems that this is a troubling form of faith that rewards people for committing acts of violence.
Imagine if Klansman David Duke claimed he was part of the Ku Klux Klan but was not a racist—that he just liked wearing sheets. Wouldn’t that be a little hard to accept as a credible concept?
While it may seem outrageously politically incorrect to do so, a number of individuals are openly questioning whether the Muslim religion is truly a religion of peace. Some of these individuals are disaffected Muslims who feel as if they were sold a bill of goods by Islamic leaders. They believe they were betrayed—and they worry that others may be hoodwinked into believing that the Islamic faith is one of peace, love, and harmony.
Islamic regimes have been responsible for major human rights violations, especially against religious minority groups and women. Even some Muslims openly admit the religion has a history of violence—at least dating back to the 12th century. While some Muslims have openly called for a peace movement within their religion, the fact of the matter is that, year after year, the news pages are filled with instances of Muslim violence.
Another important thing to keep in mind here is that lying is actually sanctioned within the Islamic religion. As Islam spreads throughout the West, Americans need to be particularly vigilant, recognizing the fact that Muslim activists may try to deceive us into believing that they do not endorse violence, when their actions say otherwise. A number of Muslims artfully neglect to mention the more controversial aspects of Islamic writings and teachings.
For instance, the Koran is often quoted selectively to indicate that the religion stands for peace and tolerance. But after Mohammed migrated to Medina, the Koran became filled with passages showing not only prejudice and intolerance, but the endorsement of violence.
For example, Mohammed, a supposed prophet of peace, commanded his army to kill a Jewish tribe. Obviously, killing is the most extreme form of violence one can engage in, and it is appalling that a religious leader would sanction what can euphemistically be described as ethnic cleansing. The Koran contends that the “only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land.” Such lines of text could never be confused with the lyrics to “Let There Be Peace on Earth.”
It’s hard to reconcile such writings with the popular image of Islam as a peace-loving religion that is being unfairly attacked. The fact is, the media are often complicit in this deception. News reports suggest that violence is perpetrated by extremists or fundamentalists, leading the average Westerner to believe that mainstream Islam does not condone any form of violence.
Because of Islam’s traditional acceptance of lying, it’s entirely possible that, when Islamic leaders speak, they are not speaking the unadulterated truth. In fact, they may say one thing and believe something entirely different.
In the end, by their fruits you will know them—and, regrettably, the fruits of Islam are often destruction, violence and death.
Nathan Tabor regularly appears on radio and is writing a book for Thomas Nelson Publishing. Nathan received his BA in psychology from St. Andrews Presbyterian College and his MA in public policy from Regent University.
In 2004, Nathan ran for Congress (NC5) in an eight-way primary. He raised over $850,000 and received over 7,500 votes in the most expensive primary in American history. Nathan's supporters included Dick Armey, Ed Meese, Steve Moore, Art Laffer, Pat Robertson, Bob Jones III, Congressman Robert Aderholt, Congressman Trent Franks, Congressman Jim Ryun, Beverly and Tim LaHaye, Mike Farris and many others. Dr. Jerry Falwell dubbed him the "young Jesse Helms."
Cover
•
Commentary
•
Books & Reviews
•
Climate Change
•
Site Links
•
Feedback
