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.

Pope Francis and Faithfulness: When have we Gone too Far

We have a lot of freedom in Christ. We can work as we want, eat and dress as we want. However, truth belongs to God. Therefore, we are not free to manipulate with it for political reasons, even good ones.

Understandably, Pope Francis is deeply disturbed by the treatment of Christians throughout the Islamic world. He therefore laudably proclaimed:

• "It is essential that all citizens – Muslim, Jewish and Christian – both in the provision and practice of the law, enjoy the same rights and respect the same duties."

However, he followed this with a pandering, pragmatic statement:

• "They will then find it easier [once they enjoy the same rights] to see each other as brothers and sisters who are travelling the same path, seeking always to reject misunderstandings while promoting cooperation and concord. Freedom of religion and freedom of expression, when truly guaranteed to each person, will help friendship to flourish and thus become an eloquent sign of peace."

There is little doubt that if citizens share the same rights on the law, this “will help friendship to flourish.” However, equality is found nowhere in the Islamic world, even in Islamic nations having “secular” constitutions. This shouldn’t be a surprise, since Sharia and Koran provide absolutely no basis for equality. Here is one example from the 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.

What are the “misunderstandings” to which the Pope alludes? The Daily Mail reports:

• Pope Francis said last night that equating Islam with violence was wrong and called on Muslim leaders to issue a global condemnation of terrorism to help dispel the stereotype.

• He told reporters aboard his plane returning from a visit to Turkey that he understood why Muslims were offended by many in the West who automatically equated their religion with terrorism.

How many jihadic verses does the Pope need before he will connect Islam and violence? There are already many hundreds, even thousands when we also consider the Hadiths! How many more Islamic terroristic groups, all claiming to find their inspiration from the Koran and Hadiths, will it take before he will connect the dots?

I appreciate the Pope’s desire for peace, but will such political maneuvering achieve it? All of our Western leaders have long hastened to call Islam the “religion of peace.” However, Islamic terror has gladly proliferated alongside of these political proclamations. It seems as if the Islamic world interprets such affirmations as weakness and a green-light to escalate the terror at the expense of millions of lives.

However, the Pope’s words raise another question. Do Christians have the freedom to distort the truth for potential political gains? The Pope stated that we “are travelling the same path, seeking always to reject misunderstandings while promoting cooperation and concord.”

Instead, we clearly have different aims. The Koran envisions a world dominated by Islam, whether through peaceful or violent means:

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

• [Surah 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” (Surah 2:191) and “murder them and treat them harshly” (9:123), and “Strike off the heads of the disbelievers” (8:12, cp. 8:60).

These are standing orders, as the many terrorist organizations and their supporters confidently understand. Are Christians free to misrepresent these central tenants of Islam in hope of political gain – cooperation, for example? An adjacent question is this – “Are we free to disown our faith if our lives depend on it?”

I don’t think that we have such freedom. Jesus explained to a Samaritan woman that truth is a inviolable element in a marriage to God. The woman was a multiculturalist and thought that religion was merely a geographical issue – Samaritans worshipped on Mt. Gerazim who the Jews worshipped on Mt. Zion. Jesus wouldn’t allow her religious pluralism to stand:

• Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from [the revelation given to] the Jews. (John 4:21-22)

We cannot relate to God in any manner we so choose. We are mandated to relate to Him in truth with our entire being:

• Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." (John 4:23-24)

Truth belongs to God. We are not free to distort it according to our own purposes. “We must worship in spirit and truth” – no wiggle-room there.

God illustrates this point in His denunciation of Job’s three friends:

• "I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” (Job 42:7-8)

The three friends had been very sacrificial. They had spent days with the ailing Job in a vain hope of correcting him of his putative errant ways. Yes, they had misrepresented God in their denunciations of Job. However, it seems that they had been speaking in this manner for Job’s own good. Nevertheless, this didn’t make up for the fact that they had not “spoken of me what is right.”

We are not free to worship God in any manner we choose. Our worship must also reflect truth. We cannot bow down with knees or even words before the god of expediency. Mordechai understood this:

• And all the king's servants who were at the king's gate bowed down and paid homage to Haman, for the king had so commanded concerning him. But Mordecai did not bow down or pay homage. Then the king's servants who were at the king's gate said to Mordecai, “Why do you transgress the king's command?” And when they spoke to him day after day and he would not listen to them, they told Haman, in order to see whether Mordecai's words would stand, for he had told them that he was a Jew. (Esther 3:2-4)

Mordechai was no one’s fool. He understood the price he would have to pay for his faithfulness to his God. However, he also understood that faithfulness to God’s truth was more important than political gain.

The three faithful Israelite young men also understood this. All Babylon had been commanded to bow down before the golden image of the King. However, they would not. Even after King Nebuchadnezzar gave them a second chance to bow down and worship, they still would not, even at the threat of a most horrible and fiery death (Daniel 3).

Faithfulness trumps pragmatic gain. Paul had charged that Peter’s behavior had denied the truth of the Gospel:

• But when Cephas [Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned [before God]. For before certain [Jewish believing] men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel. (Galatians 2:11-14) 

We are not our own. We belong to God and must never betray the truth of the Gospel, whether in word or in deed, as Peter had done. How did Peter betray the Gospel? He acted in a way which said, “We are not all equal in Christ.”

We also belong to our brethren. When we betray the Gospel, we also lead others to do so! After all, if Peter could bend the truth of the Gospel, so can we, right?

The Pope has acted in a way that says, “We can manipulate the truth for political gain.” If he can, why can’t we! If playing fast-and-easy with the truth “works,” what can be wrong with it? Just ask Paul!

I wish instead that the Pope would stand for truth and go to the UN and denounce the horrors committed by Islam against non-Muslims and continue to denounce them with all of his strength and authority.

Who is the Real Muslim?

 Is Bin Ladin the real Muslim or the peaceful Muslim next door? Debater and host of the Aramaic Broadcasting Network, David Wood, provides us with a sobering analysis of the real Islam:

• Islam is unique among world religions in that it explicitly calls for the violent subjugation of unbelievers. Western theorists insist that Islam can be reformed…However Islam does not allow Muslims to question or reinterpret the commands of Allah or Muhammad (Qur’an 33:36). Hence, any attempts to reform the Islamic concept of Jihad will be considered innovation and heresy among Muhammad’s more devout followers. (Christian Research Journal, Vol. 36/Number 01, 47)

However, whenever I mention these harsh realities to my secular friends, they brush off my concerns, claiming that they have many friendly and respectful Muslim friends and that I need to make some myself.

However, Wood insists that if the Muslim is faithful to their religion, then this show of friendship is no more than a ploy according to the Islamic doctrine of Taqiyya, which authorizes the Muslim to deceive the infidel, until they can gain the upper hand:

• Concealing the true intentions of the Islamic community in order to guard against attacks from non-Muslims. This tactic was eventually made explicit in Qur’an 3:28: “Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security” (Pickthall). This verse forbids friendship with unbelievers, unless Muslims are heavily outnumbered and they feel that they are in danger from a stronger adversary. That’s when Muslims are told to pretend to be friendly. Ibn Kathir, history’s most respected Qur’an commentator, quotes Muhammad’s companions to explain 3:28:

• Allah sad next, (unless you indeed fear the danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda said, “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them. Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, “The Tuqyah […Taqiyya] is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.”

Consistent with this, wherever Islam becomes a sizable minority, they are compelled by their faith to seek to impose Shariah law, which reduces all non-Muslims to a secondary and dependent status. It also means the end of free speech and the rights we have long cherished in the West.

Wood demonstrates that Islam has a long and deeply entrenched history of intolerance:

• In Medina, Muhammad began ordering his followers to assassinate critics. Early detractors such as Abu Afak, Asma bint Marwan, and Ka’b bin al-Ashraf were all murdered for writing poems about Muhammad or Islam…Muslims began following Muhammad’s example by killing those who spoke negatively of their prophet: “Narrated Ali ibn Abu Talib: A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died…” Muhammad eventually laid down harsh penalties of death, dismemberment, or imprisonment for the extraordinarily vague crime of “making mischief” in the land: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned…” (Qur’an 5:33. Shakir)

What then is the overriding intention of Islam? Wood claims that their purpose is to:

• Subjugate and humiliate Jews and Christians. The justification for carrying out the attacks commanded in Qur’an 9:29...  “And Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and 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!” (Qur’an 9:30) (45-46)

How do we explain the fact that peace with Islam is always so tentative? The Qur’an gives us all the explanation we need. While the Muslims are the best of peoples (3:110), the “People of the Book [the Bible] … are the worst of creatures” (98:6, Hilali-Khan). Consequently, Muslims perform righteously by fighting against these “worst of creatures”:

• “Fight those who believe not in Allah, nor the Last Day…nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth [Islam]. From among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Qur’an 9:29, Ali)

If this is all true, then concern should lead us to expose these threats. However, the West has not only failed to do this, but has criminalized those who do, charging them with “Islamophobia” and “hate speech!”

What is the true face of Islam? It really doesn’t take much to answer this question. Even if we can’t read the Qur’an, we can travel to Islamic nations, even to the supposedly “secular” Islamic nations where the religious minorities are compelled to live in fear that someone might charge them with “insulting the Prophet.”