Wow! Not politically correct, but nevertheless true. How amazing it is that he had the guts to say this in a live televised interview. I am glad that he did because it has given me the courage to say the following: It is not palatable for Muslims especially in the West to practice what the Quran teaches that they ought to practice. The teaching that they receive, which is amenable with Western cultural values, is however not complete, because it corresponds to the time period which was in Mohammeds early days of ‘ministry’, when he was still in Mecca or at the very least in the early days of his ministry in Medina (before the Battle of Badr). It was during this period before the Battle of Badr that Mohammed believed that Christians and Jews would embrace Islam because they similarly believed in one God, and hence the reason why he started off adopting a style of preaching which merely ‘warned’ people in the hope that they would repent and embrace Islam and him as the Prophet of Allah. However, Mark A. Gabriel (a former Muslim and PhD in Islamic Studies and former professor at Al-Azhar University, Cairo) wrote in his good book: Jesus and Muhammad that those peaceful Surah and Aia (chapter and verse) revelations like those found in Surah 2:256 and 29:46, which nowadays Western Muslims tend to lean on, in Mohammeds day were abrogated by those which came after the Battle of Badr like Surah 8:39 and 8:65. He states that The new cancelled out the old. He further states the following: People understood that when Muhammad said it was time to fight, this meant that the time of tolerance was over. This principle is expressed in the Quran in Surah 2:106: ‘Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things?’” Moreover, he states that “Muslim scholars refer to this as the principle of NASKH. The idea is that Muhammad’s revelations were progressive. A new revelation cancelled out an older revelation.” See also Surah 16:101 for clarification on the principle of NASKH. This means that according to the Quran - according to Mohammeds contextualised revelations, - what Muslims would nowadays be required to practice would be what Mohammed would be teaching or telling them if he were somehow, mysteriously ministering in modern day contexts instead of the original. The struggle that Allah would require his faithful to have would not ultimately be peaceful (spiritual) in nature but militant (denoting a physical struggle against a physical enemy rather than a spiritual one - namely the infidel rather than Shaitan or Satan). This is because the latter revelations abrogated the former ones that Mohammed had received at the time that he received them. Like I said, however, this is not politically correct and not culturally viable for modern day Western society Muslims to practice, hence the reason why the majority tend to be moderate in their beliefs. Besides, they couldnt do it and get away with it anyhow without major international repercussions, as evidenced by the huge outcries by the Western media and popular culture, and for this reason the vast majority are taught the moderate, peaceful doctrines with reference to jihad (Holy war), stating that it is not a physical battle but a spiritual one that they are supposed to be involved in, and in so doing, they wrongly (or rightly) overlook those militant Surah which would make the peaceful irrelevant and obsolete. They couldnt rightly believe that because that would be distasteful and unfathomable to believe and practice such things. No one would want to believe (at least I don’t) or continue to believe in a god (not God) who commands his faithful to: ““Kill the Mushrikun (pagans) wherever you find them, and capture and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush” (Surah 9:5). “Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad) (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah (tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Surah 9:29).” Mark Gabriel continues: “As you can see, Muhammad continued to call for a literal, physical jihad that ended only with the unbelievers being subdued.” This is precisely what ISIL is doing in Iraq, and what many of our western born Muslim young people (and increasingly so) are going out there to be trained to do. Do we want this? I know I don’t. How about you? – All quotes and references from the book are taken from pages 124-127.
Posted on: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 20:38:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015