KHIZR KHAN, THE DNC, AND DECEPTION

“Khizr Khan, the bereaved father of fallen soldier Capt. Humayun Khan who attacked Donald Trump last week in a speech at the Democratic National Convention, told CNN’s Jim Acosta Sunday morning that terror has “nothing to do with Islam’”: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/31/khizr-khan-muslim-dad-tells-cnn-terror-nothing-islam/

·       What he [Donald Trump] cites in the name of Islam, and all that — that is not Islam at all! I wish he would have, somebody would have put something in his head that these are terrorists, these are criminals, these folks have nothing to do with Islam.

Well, why are these terrorists all claiming to be Muslim? Why do they cry out “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is great”) in the midst of their attacks? Why do they often let Muslims go free and kill the non-Muslims? Why are they seeking a worldwide Caliphate and the imposition of Shariah Law on all? And finally, why do polls show a high approval rating for the Islamic terrorism among Muslims?

Well, the answer is plain once we just take a look at the Koran. First of all, the Koran makes it plain that Muslims are forbidden to be friends with non-Muslims, unless displays of “friendship” are used deceptively to advance Islam:

·       Koran Surah 3:27: “Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done [deceptively] to guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully.

·       5:54: “O ye who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other.

·       60:1: “O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth”

·       60:4: “Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibraaheem (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allaah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allaah Alone’”

How do Muslims understand these verses? One commentator writes (www.koranqa.com; fatwa 59879):

·       “Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers.

·       “Based on this, it is not permissible for a Muslim to feel any love in his heart towards the enemies of Allaah who are in fact his enemies too. Allaah says”:

·       “But if a Muslim treats them with kindness and gentleness in the hope that they will become Muslim and will believe, there is nothing wrong with that, because it comes under the heading of opening their hearts to Islam. But if he despairs of them becoming Muslim, then he should treat them accordingly.”

Therefore, when the believing Muslim displays friendship and makes proclamations of fidelity to the USA, it most likely is deception (“Taqiyya”). And why not! Muslims regard Allah as the great deceiver. Consequently, it is totally acceptable for the Muslim also to deceive:

·       Koran 3:54; cf. 8:30:   But they (the Jews) were deceptive, and Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers!

·       Koran 7:99:   Are they then secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi)? None deemeth himself secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi) save folk that perish.

Well, is Islam, at its core violent? These are just a few of the many Koranic surah (verses) teaching jihad:

• Koran 8:37: “Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion (Islam) reigns supreme.”

• Koran 4:5: “When the Sacred Months are over, kill those who ascribe partners [like Jesus] to God wheresoever ye find them; seize them, encompass them, and ambush them; then if they repent and observe prayer and pay the alms, let them go their way’.”

• “…kill the disbelievers wherever we find them” (Koran 2:191) and “murder them and treat them harshly” (Koran 9:123), and “Strike off the heads of the disbelievers” (Koran 8:12, cp. 8:60)

Have these verses been superseded by more peaceful Koranic verses? The exact opposite! When Muhammad began to preach, he preached peace. Without an army, he had no alternative. However, once he got an army, the peaceful verses were replaced by the violent ones.

This is the doctrine of “abrogation.” Later verses are supposed to take the place of the earlier:

·       Koran 2.106  “If we [Allah] abrogate any verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or one similar.” (Also 13.39)

Perhaps some who boldly declare that “Islam is a religion of peace” are just ignorant. Khan is not.

It would be one thing for Khan to have stated, “Islam can be used to justify many forms of violence, but this is not my interpretation of Islam.” But he didn’t say that. Instead, Khan dogmatically claimed that, “these [terrorists] are criminals, these folks have nothing to do with Islam.” This is pure deception.

DECEPTION, SCRIPTURE, MUHAMMAD, AND INTERFAITH DIALOGUE

Ian Mevorach calls himself a “Christian Minister,” but insists that:

• The time has come for Christians to recognize how wrong we have been in these assessments [about Muhammad as a false prophet] and to correct the record by affirmatively identifying Muhammad with “the Spirit of Truth” [as Jesus taught in John 14 -16].

Mevorach claims that he is writing to:

• Open the minds of Christians to receive a future revelation not as something that competes with or diminishes the Gospel, but rather as something that glorifies Jesus. Unfortunately, these words in the Gospel of John have been totally missed by Christians who reject and belittle the Qur’an; we have for the most part completely ignored the unity of the Gospel and the Qur’an in terms of their common revelatory source. However, if we take Jesus’ words seriously, we have the opportunity to receive the Word of God in the Qur’an in accordance with Jesus’ promise that the Spirit of Truth “will take what is mine and declare it to you.”

Could Jesus have possibly been referring to Muhammad in John 14-16? Well, let’s take a look:

• “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the SPIRIT OF TRUTH, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.” (John 14:15-17)

Did Muhammad “dwell with” the Israelites and would he “be in you?” Even Muslims would deny this. Would Muhammad “be with you forever?” Certainly not!

• “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” (John 14:26)

Did Muhammad bring to remembrance “all things… that I have said to you?” Certainly not! The Qur’an even denies Jesus’ teachings about dying for the sins of the world and being the “Son of God.”

• “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.” (John 15:26-27)

Instead, Muhammad bore witness to a different Jesus, denying the Crucifixion, the Deity of Christ, and salvation through Him:

• [Qur’an 4.157] And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure.

• [5:75] They do blaspheme who say, “God is Christ, the son of Mary” …Whoever joins other gods with God – God will forbid him the Garden and the fire will be his abode.

• [3:85] If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him; and in the hereafter, he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).

Mevorach acknowledges that Jesus’ references to the “Spirit of Truth” refer to the Holy Spirit but later, they refer to Muhammad:

• The major objection to applying these predictions to Muhammad or any other prophet is that Christians normally read them as part and parcel of Jesus’ promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit… But as Jesus’ farewell discourse proceeds these titles become multivalent and, in John 15:26-27 and 16:7-15, they begin to refer more to a future prophet than to the Holy Spirit.

What Mevorach is asking us to believe is absurd. It would be like writing a story about the passing of you “mother” and then, without any indication otherwise, you are referring to “Mother Teresa.” However, Jesus gave no indication that the “Spirit of Truth” would gradually refer to Muhammad. In support of this theory, Mevorach cites Jesus in John 16:

• “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of Truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, because he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine. For this reason I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:12-15, NRSV)

How is Muhammad a fulfilment, since Muhammad didn’t “declare” the biblical Jesus? Instead of glorifying Jesus, Muhammad detracted from Jesus, denying His Deity, Sonship, and even the moment of His greatest glory:

• And Jesus answered them, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.” (John 12:23-25)

Besides, Jesus insisted that “All that the Father has is mine.” However, if Muhammad is the greater prophet, who surpasses even Jesus, this assertion cannot be truth.

Yet, Mevorach insists that John 16 provides us with an unmistakable portrait of Muhammad, but how? The verses prior to the ones he cites provide addition problems for Mevorach:

• Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper [Muhammad] will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.” (John 16:7-8)

How was Muhammad able to convict the world of sin? Was he as omnipresent as the Spirit? (omnipresence would be a requirement for anyone who was going to convict the world of sin!) Instead, of convicting the world of sin, his teachings have led to endless wars for world conquest, causing Islam to be called the “Ultimate Killing Machine.”

In addition to this, Jesus insisted that the “Spirit of Truth,” the Helper, would come when Jesus would leave and would teach His Apostles what they “cannot bear” to hear when Jesus was with them. However, Muhammad did not come until almost 600 years later and was not received by the people of Jesus, let alone did Muhammad ever instruct His Apostles.

What evidence does Mevorach have to claim that these teachings are fulfilled by Muhammad? Why not the head of the Mormons, Jim Jones, or David Koresh? Mevorach can offer only the Qur’an, a book compiled 600 years after Jesus:

• For centuries Muslim interpreters have seen Muhammad as this “Advocate,” based on Qur’an 61:6, a verse in which Jesus predicts the coming of a future prophet named Ahmad: “O Children of Israel! Truly I am the Messenger of God unto you, confirming that which came before me in the Torah and bearing glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me whose name is Ahmad.”

However, 600 years earlier, the Holy Spirit came upon the Christian Church, transforming a fearful group of people into bold ambassadors for Christ – people that Islam had to put to death by the millions in order to secure their ends. And their genocide continues today under the names of ISIS, Islamic Jihad, Boko Haram, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, and many other groups, all assured that, according to their holy writings, they are serving Allah.

Meanwhile, Muslims in the West use other means. Mevorach assures us that fear and threat are not at all at stake here, just friendly persuasion:

• Based on the promises of Jesus, Christians can encounter the Qur’an without fear, knowing that it is a revelation which glorifies Jesus and, in a spiritual sense, is from him.

You might then ask, “How can Mevorach call himself a “Christian minister? Easy! Islam is a religion of deception (Taqiyya). Even friendship is to be used as a tool of deception:

• [Qur’an 3:27] Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done [deceptively] to guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully.

• [5:54] O ye who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other.

• [60:1] “O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth”

• [60:4] “Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibraaheem (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allaah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allaah Alone’”

How do Muslims understand these verses? This is an important question, since Western Muslims will claim that this is all just a matter of interpretation. Therefore, it cannot be taken literally. However, one representative commentator writes (www.koranqa.com; fatwa 59879):

• “Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers.

• “Based on this, it is not permissible for a Muslim to feel any love in his heart towards the enemies of Allaah who are in fact his enemies too. Allaah says”:

• “But if a Muslim treats them with kindness and gentleness in the hope that they will become Muslim and will believe, there is nothing wrong with that, because it comes under the heading of opening their hearts to Islam. But if he despairs of them becoming Muslim, then he should treat them accordingly.”

What does it mean to treat them accordingly? In order to answer this question, we have to understand the overall thrust of Islam – for the entire world to live in submission to Islam, by persuasion or by bloodshed.

Ibn Khaldun, the 15th century Tunisian historian, states:

• In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force... Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

Here’s the Koranic basis for this:

• [Qur’an 8:37] Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion (Islam) reigns supreme.
  

• [4:5]  When the Sacred Months are over, kill those who ascribe partners [like Jesus] to God wheresoever ye find them; seize them, encompass them, and ambush them; then if they repent and observe prayer and pay the alms, let them go their way.

• [Qur’an 8:12, cp. 8:60]   Strike off the heads of the disbelievers,” “Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them” (2:191) and “murder them and treat them harshly” (9:123).

The West regularly hosts many interfaith discourses, thinking that these will promote friendship and harmony, as evidenced by this Mevorach’s article in the Huffington Press. However, the West is merely providing a platform for a deception of the unwary, a platform gladly embraced by every Islamist. Meanwhile, such discussions cannot occur in the Islamic world without heads rolling. Perhaps this should tell us something about the true intents of Islam.

AN IDEALISM UNACCOMPANIED BY WISDOM IS DEADLY

As an idealistic 21 year-old, I decided that I was going to transform NYC. How? I was going to greet every passerby with a “Hello” and a smile. Why not! I wanted our city to be a friendlier, more humane place, and I felt uplifted that it was I who had the courage to champion this great cause.

I commenced my crusade at Riverside Park, where there was no shortage of people to greet. After several hours, I sat down on a park bench. Shortly afterwards, an older male sat down next to me. I recognized him as one who I had greeted. After several jokes, he invited me to walk up to Broadway to have a beer with him. Although I felt uncomfortable about this encounter, I couldn’t back away from my cause. Already, I had too much invested. Besides, I was the one who had initiated the contact.

He walked so quickly up to Broadway, I could barely keep up with him. When I did reach him, he had already emerged from the grocery with a six-pack. He then insisted in returning to the park, but it had already become dark. Since he had already paid for the six-pack, and I was still on my crusade to change the city, albeit more reluctantly, I followed him, even into the bushes of the darkened park.

In the midst of the bushes, he began to move closer to me. I had intended to drink one beer with him, fulfill my social ideal, and then hastily move on. However, his trajectory would now allow for this. I didn’t want to hurt his feelings – certainly not in light of my idealistic intentions – so I would force him to reject me. I therefore invented an elaborate lie to make myself utterly odious to him, and it succeeded, allowing me time to casually escape, without violating my “idealism.”

It later became painfully apparent to me that my other-centered vision had been built on false premises. For one thing, I lacked the resources to be able to pull it off. More importantly, I had mistakenly thought that if I showed kindness to others, they would show kindness to me and to others.

Sometimes, this is a good strategy, but sometimes, it is not. Neville Chamberlain had thought that the strategy of kindness would work with Adolf Hitler, but he didn’t understand him, and this proved costly.

Why wasn’t I able to modify my strategy or methodology once I had encountered a man who wouldn’t reciprocate in kind – one who wanted to use me for his own benefit? I was too committed to my ideal. I even liked being committed to it. Perhaps Chamberlain had been too committed to his ideal of peace, even after it became obvious that peace was out of reach, when it came to a Hitler. Hadn’t he read Mein Kampf?

Wisdom requires flexibility both in ideal and in action. Instead, I had been strong in commitment and idealism but weak in seeing things accurately and making the necessary adjustments.

Having seen these weaknesses in myself, I can also see them in others. I see these same tendencies among Western ideologues who have committed themselves to the ideal of an international community of brethren. We talk about interfaith dialogues, trying to find sturdy commonalities among the various religions upon which we can build bridges of friendship and cooperation.

While this is a wonderful ideal, perhaps we are once again playing Chamberlain to a Hitler. Perhaps our ideal is ill-fated because we have failed to understand the various players. Perhaps we are making the same mistake that I had made – that kindness will be reciprocated to kindness.

When I speak about the Islamic commitment to world domination and a worldwide Caliphate, people often respond, “You probably don’t have any Muslim friends,” suggesting that, if I did, I wouldn’t have these opinions. I respond that Muslims can be very nice people. I have known several who have assured me that Islam is a peaceful religion, and their own conduct has seemed to affirm their assurances.

However, I also know what the Koran and the Sayings of Muhammad teach, and there is little peaceful about them. In fact, the Koran even warns Muslims that they cannot be friends with non-Muslims:

• [Surah 3:27] “Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done [deceptively] to guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully. 

• [5:54] O ye who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other.

• [60:1] “O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth”

• [60:4] “Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibraaheem [Abraham] and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allaah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allaah Alone’”

How do Muslims understand these verses? This is an important question simply because when you cite surah to a Muslim that disagrees with his position, he will tell you that you have to understand the historical context before you can understand the surah. Therefore, I like to also consult Islamic commentators who write to other Muslims, not just us naïve Westerners. One commentator writes (www.koranqa.com; fatwa 59879):

• “Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers. 

• “Based on this, it is not permissible for a Muslim to feel any love in his heart towards the enemies of Allaah who are in fact his enemies too.” 

• “But if a Muslim treats them with kindness and gentleness in the hope that they will become Muslim and will believe, there is nothing wrong with that, because it comes under the heading of opening their hearts to Islam. But if he despairs of them becoming Muslim, then he should treat them accordingly.”

Islamic friendship-deception is part of a larger practice known as Taqiyya, which authorizes Muslims to deceive non-Muslims for the sake of advancing Islam.

Knowing this, how then do we relate to Muslims? As a Christian, I must receive the Muslim in love, in hope of showing him a better way. His mind has been taken captive by the Devil to do his will (Eph. 6:12). However, we have a responsibility to him to help him see the light:

• And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will. (2 Timothy 2:24-26)

This suggests that we should be willing to embrace our Muslim neighbors with real kindness. However, this doesn’t mean that we are to give the Muslim a platform so that he can spread his religion and take others captive. To do this would be to partake in his evil works. Sadly, this is the substance of many of our interfaith dialogues. Shouldn’t we find it strange that we are never invited into the Mosque to speak about Christianity?

What does this suggest about the possibility of welcoming Muslim refugees into our land? If they are truly Muslim, they must obey the teachings of Muhammad, which are supposed to come from Allah. What do these teachings require of a Muslim? The death of the infidel if he refuses to convert or to submit entirely to sharia law:

• (Koran Surah 8:37) “Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion (Islam) reigns supreme.”

• (4:5) “When the Sacred Months are over, kill those who ascribe partners [like Jesus] to God wheresoever ye find them; seize them, encompass them, and ambush them; then if they repent and observe prayer and pay the alms, let them go their way’.”

• “…kill the disbelievers wherever we find them” (2:191) and “murder them and treat them harshly” (9:123), and “Strike off the heads of the disbelievers” (8:12, cp. 8:60).

How does Islam understand these many commands to do jihad until the entire world is under the Islamic Caliphate? Ibn Khaldun, the 15th century Tunisian historian, stated:

• In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force... Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

Knowing these things, what does Christ’s love require of me? He came to comfort the afflicted and not to unleash murderers upon the innocent. This must also be our concern. If we were to instead bring murderers and rapists into our communities, this would bring the Church into disrepute.

Immigration is also a form of Jihad:

• He who emigrates (from his home) in the Cause of Allah [Jihad], will find on earth many dwelling places and plenty to live by. And whosoever leaves his home as an emigrant unto Allah and His Messenger, and death overtakes him, his reward is then surely incumbent upon Allah. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And when you (Muslims) travel in the land, there is no sin on you if you shorten your Salat (prayer) if you fear that the disbelievers may attack you, verily, the disbelievers are ever unto you open enemies. (Koran 4:100-101) 

How can our idealism serve to bring into our neighborhoods those who want to rape, kidnap, and kill? It must not! Idealism is essential to life and the well-being of society, but when idealism is not directed by wisdom, it either dies or becomes malignant.

HOW CAN WE DISCERN WHICH MUSLIMS WILL RESPECT US AS FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS?

This is a critical issue. Many Westerners claim that they have good Muslim friends. They therefore reason that Muslims are just as respectful as other people. But is “friendship” a reliable test? Perhaps not! There are numerous Koranic verses claiming that Muslims cannot be friends with the non-Muslim:

•                  [Surah 3:27] “Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done [deceptively] to guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully.

•                  [5:54] O ye who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other.

•                  [60:1] “O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth”

•                  [60:4] “Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibraaheem (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allaah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allaah Alone’”

How do Muslims understand these verses? One commentator writes (www.koranqa.com; fatwa 59879):

•                  “Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers.

•                  “Based on this, it is not permissible for a Muslim to feel any love in his heart towards the enemies of Allaah who are in fact his enemies too. Allaah says”:

•                  “But if a Muslim treats them with kindness and gentleness in the hope that they will become Muslim and will believe, there is nothing wrong with that, because it comes under the heading of opening their hearts to Islam. But if he despairs of them becoming Muslim, then he should treat them accordingly.”

How then can we tell which Muslims will not hurt us or approve of those who do hurt us? It is clearly difficult to tell!