Islam had a "decisive" role in the expansion of slavery in Europe...
In my newly-published book, "Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization", I argue at length that a great majority of the things commonly regarded as “Medieval” were in fact introduced to Europe from Islam, and that it was Islam, and not the Huns, Vandals and Goths, which terminated Classical Civilization, the rational and humane civilization of Greece and Rome. This civilization survived in Europe and in North Africa and the Near East until the seventh century, at which point it was terminated by the Muslim conquests.
In point of fact, Islam’s influence upon Europe was much greater than is commonly imagined, but that influence was entirely negative. Not only did the Muslims terminate Classical Civilization, but they dragged Europe, on many levels, down to a more barbarous level of culture. It was from the Muslims, for example, that Christian Europeans got the idea of “Holy War,” a concept that would have been unthinkable in earlier centuries.
And from Islam too, the institution of slavery, as well as the slave trade, received a new and powerful impetus.
Contrary to the beliefs of some modern anti-Christian writers, Christianity brought an immediate and dramatic improvement in the living conditions of slaves in the Roman Empire. It was also, eventually, instrumental in the abolition of the entire institution. The improvement was an inevitable consequence of the Christian notion that the mistreatment of any human being, whether slave or free, was gravely sinful. In the words of one writer, “The effect of the Church upon the Empire may be summed up in the word ‘freedom’.” (H. F. Stewart, “Thoughts and Ideas of the Period,” in ‘The Cambridge Medieval History: The Christian Empire’, Vol. 1, 2nd ed. 1936, p. 592). And, “Close upon the Church’s victory follows legislation more favorable to the slave than any that had gone before” (Ibid.) Whilst it is true that “Constantine did not attempt sudden or wholesale emancipation, which would have been unwise and impossible,” he nevertheless immediately “sought to lessen his [the slave’s] hardships by measures which with all their inequalities are unique in the statute-book of Rome. … he forbade cruelty towards slaves in terms which are themselves an indictment of existing practice.”(Ibid., p. 593) The Gospel passages of relevance here are too numerous to mention, but we should note in particular the story of the Final Judgment as told in Mark 25: 31-46, where the King (God) tells His servants: “So long as you did it to these, the least of my brethren, you did it to me.” It should be remarked also, at this point, that the whole concept of human rights, attributed by many contemporary westerners to the thinkers of the Enlightenment, is rooted in this Gospel concept – a fact admitted by the Enlightenment philosophers themselves. Human rights are a moral as well as a judicial concept. If God will hold each of us accountable for our behavior towards the lowliest members of society, this places the latter on a par, in moral terms, with the highest members of society.
Thus from the start, the lives of slaves improved. This was especially the case with female and younger male slaves, whose function, in the past, was very often to provide sexual pleasure for their owners. This type of transgression was especially frowned upon by Christians. And so, whilst the owning of slaves was not, to begin with, illegal, mistreatment – from the very start – was. This view led, inexorably, to the abandonment and abolition of the entire slave system. We find therefore, from the earliest times, many Christian leaders, such as Gregory of Nyssa and John Chrysostom, condemning slavery itself and calling for better treatment for slaves. In fact, tradition describes Pope Clement I (92-99), Pope Pius I (roughly 158-167) and Pope Callixtus I (217-222) as former slaves.
After Christianity became the official religion of the Empire the more noxious manifestations of slavery, such as gladiatorial contests, were one by one abolished; and finally, with the *Corpus* of laws promulgated by Justinian, in the sixth century, we find a formal condemnation of the institution. The rationale was explained in the ‘Institutiones’, (Title III, Book 1, paragraph 2) where we read the following: “Slavery is an institution of the law of nations, against nature, subjecting one man to the dominion of another.” Again, in Title II, Book 1, paragraph 2, it states “... the law of nations is common to the whole human race; for nations have settled certain things for themselves as occasion and the necessities of human life required. For instance, wars arose and then followed captivity and slavery, which are contrary to the law of nature; for by the law of nature all men from the beginning were born free.”
The Justinianic code was introduced into Italy (in 554), from where it was to pass to Western Europe in the twelfth century and become the basis of much European law. It passed also to Eastern Europe where it appeared in Slavic editions, and became the cornerstone of Russian law.
The end result of all this was that by the tenth or even ninth century the Church had effectively ended slavery in Europe. And this is a fact well-known. In the words of Rodney Stark, “… slavery ended in medieval Europe only because the church extended its sacraments to all slaves and then managed to impose a ban on the enslavement of Christians (and Jews). Within the context of medieval Europe, that prohibition was effectively a rule of universal abolition.” (Rodney Stark, 'The Victory of Reason', Random House, New York, 2005, p. 28)
The above statement is conservative. In fact, by the seventh century slavery was well on the way to disappearing throughout Europe; but then, at that point, new life was breathed into it, and the slave-trade experienced a massive revival. The revival was a direct result of the arrival of Islam.
Islamic custom and practice with regard to slavery was always diametrically opposed to that of Christianity: For whereas Christianity acted to emphasize the equality of all before God and to alleviate the conditions of slaves, whose bodies were certainly not open to the sexual exploitation which was frequently the fate of the slave in classical antiquity, Islam had no problem whatsoever with slavery. Indeed, the taking of comely captives seems to have been seen, from the very beginning, as a legitimate bonus owed to the warriors fighting to spread the faith. Thus, for example, after the slaughter of the male members of the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza Muhammad took one of the most beautiful female captives as a concubine; whilst other successful military exploits of the Prophet invariably involved his procuring of slaves. And this behavior is fully sanctioned, for later generations, by the authority of the Koran. Thus, we read, in Sura 23: 5-6: “…abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess - for (in their case) they are free from blame.” See also Sura 4:24.
In the words of Robert Spencer, “The Qur’an says that the followers of Muhammad are ‘ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another’ (48:29), and that the unbelievers are the ‘worst of created beings’ (98:6). One may exercise the Golden Rule [do unto others as you would have them do unto you] in relation to a fellow Muslim, but according to the laws of Islam, the same courtesy is not to be extended to unbelievers. That is one principal reason why the primary source of slaves in the Islamic world has been non-Muslims, whether Jews, Christians, Hindus, or pagans. Most slaves were non-Muslims who had been captured during jihad warfare.” (Robert Spencer, 'Religion of Peace: Why Christianity is and Islam isn’t' (Regnery, 2008, p. 95).
The Muslim advance through the Middle East and North Africa meant the reestablishment, on a massive scale, of the slave trade, a trade which the Christian rulers of the late Roman Empire, particularly Justinian, had almost brought to an end. Historian Bat Ye’or says: “When Amr conquered Tripoli (Libya) in 643, he forced the Jewish and Christian Berbers to give their wives and children as slaves to the Arab army as part of their *jizya*. From 652 until its conquest in 1276, Nubia was forced to send an annual contingent of slaves to Cairo. Treaties concluded with the towns of
Transoxiana [Iranian central Asia], Sijistan [eastern Iran], Armenia, and Fezzan (Maghreb) under the Umayyads and Abbasids stipulated an annual dispatch of slaves from both sexes. However, the main sources for the supply of slaves remained the regular raids on villages within the dar-al-harb [non-Islamic regions] and the military expeditions which swept more deeply into the infidel lands, emptying towns and provinces of their inhabitants.” (Bat Ye’or, ‘The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude, New Jersey, 1996, p. 108).
‘In ‘Holy Warriors’, I describe in detail the devastating effect of Muslim raids at this time across the Mediterranean world. The latter sea became a war-zone, and normal trade came to an end. One type of trade alone survived: the trade in human bodies. And the devastation was not confined to southern Europe. The north of the continent became quickly involved in the general ruin: For that strange phenomenon, the Viking expansion, was intimately and directly related to the arrival of Islam. Hugh Trevor-Roper puts it thus: “What were these Vikings doing? What sudden force drove these piratical Northmen to range over the seas and rivers of Europe, creating havoc? It used to be supposed that it was merely a sudden, unexplained growth of population in Scandinavia which lay behind this extraordinary outburst. No doubt this was true: so vast an expansion cannot have been sustained by a static population. But the scope and direction of the raids point also to other motives. There were opportunities abroad as well as pressures at home; and these opportunities link together the Viking raids and the Moslem conquests” (Hugh Trevor-Roper, ‘The Rise of Christian Europe’, London, 1966, p. 90).
Trevor-Roper goes on to describe the vast wealth accumulated by the Muslim Caliphate in its expansion across Asia and Africa, and how, with this wealth, it could purchase what it wanted from Europe. What the Muslims wanted, above all, was “eunuchs and slaves.” He continues: “It was one of the functions of the Vikings to supply these goods. Half traders, half pirates, they ranged over all northern Europe, and in their ranging, or through the method of piracy, they collected furs and kidnapped human beings. For preference they dealt in heathen Slavs, since Christian States had less compunction in handling a slave-trade in heathen bodies – they could always quote that useful text, 'Leviticus' xxv, 44. So the Vikings fed both Byzantium and the rich new civilization of Islam with the goods which they demanded and for which they could pay. In doing so they penetrated all the coasts and rivers of Europe.” (Ibid., pp. 90-1) In the above quotation Trevor-Roper repeats the erroneous notion, prevalent until the last decades of the twentieth century, that Byzantium somehow escaped the ravages of the Saracens and that in her territory there continued to flourish an intact and prosperous branch of ancient Rome. Constantinople, he imagines, like Damascus, was a wealthy recipient of Russian slaves. Yet by the end of the seventh century, as I show in great detail in *Holy Warriors*, the formerly great power of Eastern Rome was little more than an impoverished rump, cut off, just as surely as the West, from the wealth and learning of Asia. If there was a slave trade in Byzantium, it was only as a link in the chain that brought eunuchs and concubines from Russia to Damascus and Baghdad. What little gold Byzantium possessed in the tenth and eleventh centuries was from the taxes levied on Muslim merchants of human flesh, who frequented the Viking-supplied markets of the ancient capital. The gold derived from this infamous trade was known as ‘aurum arabicum’, Arab gold, or, as humane men preferred to call it, ‘aurum infelix’, unhappy gold. By the tenth century large quantities of this Arab gold and silver had found its way to Scandinavia. Viking longboats were apparently not infrequent visitors to Islamic ports in Iberia, and the occasional Arab traveler returned the compliment by visiting Scandinavia.
Whilst, as Trevor-Roper says, the majority of European slaves delivered to the Arabs were Slavs, not all of them were. Indeed, the Vikings plundered all of western Europe to supply the markets of the Caliphate. Dublin, for example, established by the Vikings in Ireland, was a major slave market, with most of the captives bought and sold coming from Ireland and Britain. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that the majority of slaves sold to the Muslims were heathen Slavs, and there is no doubt also that some of the Christian rulers of Western Europe were complicit in the trade. Venice, for example, acted as a depot for the collection and sale of Slavic captives from Dalmatia. Marseilles too, it seems, also was active. In the words of Trevor-Roper: “For if the Vikings were the pioneers, the princes of Europe, or some of them, were the middlemen in the new slave-trade. They licensed it and they profited by it, though they left the direct traffic in it to the Jews, who could move most easily across the frontiers of the two societies. We have plenty of evidence of this trade and its routes … Liutprand of Cremona, the ambassador of the West who, in the tenth century, stood agog before the kaleidoscope pageantry of the Byzantine court, tells us that it was the merchants of Verdun who, for the immense profit of the trade, made boys into eunuchs and sold them through Moorish Spain to the rich Moslem world … The trade has left its mark in the languages of both Christendom and Islam. ‘Sclavi’, ‘Slavs’, has formed, in every European language, the word for slaves; and the same word, ‘Sakaliba’, has provided the Arabic word for eunuchs” (Ibid., p. 92).
By the late tenth and eleventh centuries Scandinavia was converted to Christianity, and the slave trade came to an end in the north of Europe. In the south, however, it was a very different story. For centuries, in Spain, in Sicily, in Greece, and all along the Mediterranean coastlands, Muslim corsairs raided incessantly, capturing entire communities and selling them in the slave markets of Cairo, Damascus and Baghdad. Even worse, the Christian populations of southern Europe, especially of Spain and southern Italy, began to take on many of the habits and customs of their Islamic foes. These included the keeping and marketing of slaves. It is little surprise then, that the great revival of slave-trading, which marked the European colonization of the Americas, would be driven by freebooters from the Iberian Peninsula. And we should never forget that, to begin with, the Atlantic slave trade with the Americas was entirely a Spanish and Portuguese enterprise. The nations of northern Europe did not participate. Famously, Queen Elizabeth I of England initially refused to become involved, declaring the trade an outrage against God and humanity. Later however, probably corrupted by the example of the Spaniards and Portuguese, she changed tack and began Britain’s involvement in the noxious trade.
Louis Betrand is scathing of the influence exerted upon Christian Spain by Islam. “The worst characteristic which the Spaniards acquired was the parasitism of the Arabs and the nomad Africans: the custom of living off one’s neighbour’s territory, the raid raised to the level of an institution, marauding and brigandage recognized as the sole means of existence for the man-at-arms. In the same way they went to win their bread in Moorish territory, so the Spaniards later went to win gold and territory in Mexico and Peru.
“They were to introduce there, too, the barbarous, summary practices of the Arabs: putting everything to fire and sword, cutting down fruit-trees, razing crops, devastating whole districts to starve out the enemy and bring them to terms; making slaves everywhere, condemning the population of the conquered countries to forced labour. All these detestable ways the conquistadores learnt from the Arabs.
“For several centuries slavery maintained itself in Christian Spain, as in the Islamic lands. Very certainly, also, it was to the Arabs that the Spaniards owed the intransigence of their fanaticism, the pretension to be, if not the chosen of God, at least the most Catholic nation of Christendom. Philip II, like Abd er Rahman or El Mansour, was Defender of the Faith.
“Finally, it was not without contagion that the Spaniards lived for centuries in contact with a race of men who crucified their enemies and gloried in piling up thousands of severed heads by way of trophies. The cruelty of the Arabs and the Berbers also founded a school in the Peninsula. The ferocity of the emirs and the caliphs who killed their brothers or their sons with their own hands was to be handed on to Pedro the Cruel and Henry of Trastamare, those stranglers under canvas, no better than common assassins.” (Louis Betrand and Sir Charles Petrie, ‘The History of Spain’, 2nd ed. London, 1945, p. 160).
John J. O’Neill is the author of “Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization”.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Wondering , January 13, 2010
Thank You, Truth Detector.
Seperately we are just fingers, frequently pointing in many directions, often at each other. Together we are the fist that will help rid the world of this evil called Islam.
Education is the key, when people are educated they leave Islam as fast as they can. For they do not want to pass this evil on to their children.
Together we can make a difference.
Cheers
written by Didymus the (semi)blind , January 13, 2010
Islam IS slavery!
written by COMMON SENCE , January 13, 2010
Why Jesus killed more than 100,000 black, innocent, poor christians or humans in Haiti yesterday OR
Why couldnt Jesus save them.
Please feel free to reply
written by Clement , January 14, 2010
written by COMMON SENCE , January 14, 2010
Please read my question again with open eyes and reply if you can..my question is "why Jesus killed 100,000 poor, black, innocent humans in yesterdays earthquake in Haiti".
I hope you are aware of the disaster in Haiti happened yesterday
written by Wondering , January 14, 2010
I wish it hadnt happened, but it was completely beyond my or anyone else on this earths ability to control.
Now lets see how the world is reacting to those in Haiti who are now in so much need. (Much like the world reacts to an earthquake in Iran or Pakistan, or a Tsuami which rolls across an entire ocean) America, is sending one at least one Hospital ship with a capicity of 2000 beds, and at least one Helecopter Support ship with a 500 bed hospital and scores of air ambulances, and their attendent support facilities. Thousands of emergency workers and their equipment plus millions and millions in aid. Canada and Europe is sending workers, money and aid, as is Japan and Latin America.
The Islamic world which receives almost a billion dollars a day for its oil, is sending nothing. (but they send nothing or next to nothing to any Natural Disaster) The Holy warriors of Islam are rejoycing that the rest of the world is rushing aid to Haiti and is forgetting about their 'Holy War' for a bit. As far as they are concerned it is just another 100,000 poor, black, innocent humans that will burn in Allah's Islamic Hell.
I challange you to think more about what what we the living can do to help those that are in need rather than ask questions that cannot be answered. This is not the place for questions which cannot be answered. Notice no body asked the question, why did Allah kill 100,000 poor, black, innocent humans in yesterdays earthquake in Haiti? Maybe the answer is in the question.
Good luck with your game playing, I hope you don't mind if the rest of us continue to do everything we can to help those in Haiti. Now if you can control yourself, lets get back to 'Telling the Truth about Islam".
I dare you.
written by Lizz E , January 14, 2010
written by zhivago , January 14, 2010
written by Archpagan , January 15, 2010
Slavery fell into disuse in mediaeval Europe owing to economic reason; feudalism was found to be more suitable in the new agrarian system of economy. The Church's ban on enslavement of Christians and Jews stemmed from the urge to Christianize the whole of Europe. In the colonial era the same church provided theological input to slavery ruling that black people have no soul.
Caste/ Varna system of the hindus was far more civilized and humane.
written by Clement , January 15, 2010
written by Ahmed Maajid , January 15, 2010
The Muslims during the time of the Prophet Muhammad began military operations against the Christians of Syria only when a peaceful messenger on a 'missionary' journey to a Syrian locality was unjustly and barbarously killed by the Christians there. May be one life does not cost much to you (especially considering that he was a Muslim and a follower of Muhammad). But to us, one life is as beloved and as worthy as all mankind. That is the reason why the Muslims went into war against the Arab Christian Syrian murderers for the first time. And you know what happened then? The Byzantine empire came to aid the wrongdoers with military support (as they were the auxiliaries of the Empire). As such, the Byzantines declared war on the nascent Islamic State. After that, the Byzantines planned to attack even the heart of Islamic State, and it was based on evidence of their preparation that the Prophet Muhammad later took another army towards the Syrian border (but he did not conduct an offensive, and came back without a confrontation). And then came the so-called 'riddah' wars, which were actually a series of armed, barbarous, and threatening rebellions against the Islamic State based on immoral and improper grounds. The terrorist rebels perpetrated violent crimes against the Muslims, and that was the reason why Caliph Abu Bakr waged war against them (you may say that even in such a situation, the MUSLIMS should not have any right to defend themselves and fight for the continuation of their State). And the Christian Byzantine Empire helped the rebels in these atrocities. And what do you expect?
THe Muslims attacked Byzantine basically because they had chosen to take an offensive and hostile stand against the Muslims, and helped enemies of the Islamic State in their rebellion. Looking further, the Byzantine Greeks, unlike your gurus Spencer and Riley-Smith would have us all believe, were NOT religious 'brothers' of the Christians of Syria. THe Syrians, who followed different creeds than those of the alien Greek Byzantines, were oppressed, and considered as 'heretics' (who were no better than infidels to Christians orthodox and catholic mainstream scholars in those days) and persecuted. The Muslims not only stroke against a hostile enemy who had shown more than once their desire to eliminate the Islamic State, but was a tyrant and oppressor, who had looted and pillaged the Syrian Christians for centuries. THe Muslims, thus, attacked the Byzantines, liberated the Syrian Christians from their menace. Believe it or not, the Muslims treated the Christians of Syrian, Egyptian and other North African Christians much better than the Byzantines had.
You are shameless liars - but we have no desire of fighting with you. THe Qur'anic commands for fighting are within a context, a fact which you seem to be resisting for some reason (hatred, bias and prejudice, blindness of intellect and mind are common reasons why people resist such facts) and unlike the Bible, which literally commands the ruthless killing of babies, women and old people in addition to males, and rape of all women "who had not known a man", the Qur'an teaches a perfect moral code, and the Prophet Muhammad showed the best example of humanly virtues and righteousness.
Go on with your hatred, but know this .. Your hatred will undo you some day!
written by Modern Day , January 15, 2010
Indian Workers Sold Like Cattle
http://timesofindia.indiatimes...408084.cms
Saudi Throws Kenyan Maid Out the Top Floor Window
http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-...index.html
written by Modern Day , January 15, 2010
Plus that does not make sense - if Muslims, as you say, believe that one life is as beloved as worthy as all mankind, then going to war and killing many more people than those who killed one person would go against that sentiment. You cannot show you value even one life by killing many other lives. You show it by behaving more humanely to those who oppose you. Unless you meant, the life of one Muslim is worth the lives of countless infidels.
written by Modern Day , January 15, 2010
So what happened? Where did Umar get the idea that no non-Muslims were to live in the Arabian Peninsula?
written by Tabris , January 15, 2010
Can you explain how muslims with the "perfect" moral code ended up in Tours France fighting and losing a battle agains Charles the Hammer? Was their conquest all the way from Mekka to Tours self defence? Did the Franks at that time try to destroy the islamic state? Or did they perpetrate violent crimes against the Muslims? Please explain, I'm very curious how cleverly you can twist the truth here.
written by Wondering , January 16, 2010
Oh yes it is those pesky bits in the Qur'an, Allah's silly book that says:
Qur'an 5:17 "Verily they are disbelievers and infidels who say, 'The Messiah, son of Mary, is God.'"
Qur'an 5:51 "Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other."
Qur'an 5:72 "They are surely infidels who blaspheme and say: 'God is Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary.' But the Messiah only said: 'O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.'"
Qur'an 72:15 "But the Qasitun (disbelievers) are the firewood of hell."
Qur'an 88:1 "Has the narration reached you of the overwhelming (calamity)? Some faces (Jews and Christians) that Day, will be humiliated, downcast, scorched by the burning fire, while they are made to drink from a boiling hot spring."
Qur'an 9:29 "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, who do not forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, or acknowledge the Religion of Truth (Islam), (even if they are) People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizyah tribute tax in submission, feeling themselves subdued and brought low." [Another translation says:] "pay the tax in acknowledgment of our superiority and their state of subjection."
"From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We made a covenant, but they forgot and abandoned a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, stirred up enmity and hatred among them to the Day of Doom. Soon will Allah show them the handiwork they have done."
Qur'an 5:17 "...Say (Muhammad): 'Who then has the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary, his mother, and everyone else on earth?"
Qur'an 5:18 "The Jews and the Christians say: 'We are sons of Allah, and his beloved.' Say: 'Why then does He punish you for your sins? Nay, you are but men. He forgives whom He wishes and punishes whom He pleases.'"
Qur'an 5:35 "Believers, fear Allah and seek the way to approach Him, striving hard, fighting Jihad with all your might in His Cause that you may be successful. As for the disbelievers [previously defined as Christians], if they had everything on earth, two times over, to give as ransom for the penalty of the Day of Doom, it would never be accepted from them. Theirs will be a painful torment. They will desire to get out of the fire, but they shall not be released from it. They shall have an everlasting torture."
Qur'an 5:49 "And this (He commands): Judge between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their [Christian] desires, but beware of them lest they beguile you, seducing you away from any of that which Allah hath sent down to you. And if they turn you away [from being Muslims], be assured that for their crime it is Allah's purpose to smite them. Truly most men are rebellious."
Qur'an 5:68 "Say: 'People of the Scripture Book! You have no ground to stand upon unless you observe the Taurat [Torah], the Injeel [Gospel], and all the Revelation that has come to you from your Lord.' It is certain to increase their rebellion and blasphemy. But grieve you not over unbelieving people."
Qur'an 5:75 "The Messiah, Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had to eat their food. See how Allah does make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded!"
Qur'an 5:77 "Say (Muhammad): 'People of the Book, do not overstep the bounds in your religion, or follow the people who erred and led many astray. Cursed are the unbelievers among the Children of Israel by David and Jesus.... They do vile things, allying themselves with the infidels so that Allah's indignation is upon them and in torment they will suffer for all eternity." [Another translation reads:] "Curses were pronounced on the unbelievers, the Children of Israel who rejected Islam, by the tongues of David and of Jesus because they disobeyed and rebelled."
Qur'an 5:82 "You will find the Jews and disbelievers [defined as Christians in 5:73] the most vehement in hatred for the Muslims."
Qur'an 5:111 "Behold! I inspired the [Christian] disciples to have faith in Me and My Messenger. They said, 'We are believers, and bear witness that we prostrate ourselves to Allah as Muslims.'"
The Christians have given up attempting to justfy slavery using the Bible because it is just wrong to keep people in slavery, where as Islam wants to make slaves of all of us who are allowed to live.
Good luck with that, I believe Islam is being exposed as the Evil that it actually is. The more people are educated as to what Islam actually says in its Qur'an the less sympathy and support Islam will get.
written by wayne , January 16, 2010
written by Clement , January 18, 2010
-Abraham’s connection as the one who built the kaaba- the idol house of idolatry is the only spiritual lies that hold the cult of Islam as a religion. Abraham was called out of Idolatry and not into idolatry and lived and died in Palestine, the present Israel and not in the Valley of Mecca in Arabia 1000 km remote. The Bible and History have proved that this was a lie just to legitimize Islam as a religion. This is an example of blind faith.
- Apostate of Islam are killed proving its cultism and not a religion
B.-Blood atonement was Gods revelation which predate Christianity and Islam and foreshadowed the finished work of atonement by Christ in the New Testament But Islam denies it in ignorant. Lev 17:11, Heb 9:22
-Blackstone in the corner of Kaaba was worshipped in Arabia as an Idol before Islam and is still worshipped and venerated today as religious rituals that will open the gate of paradise for the worshipper. This is forbidden in the Bible.
C.-Christ the messiah, the son of God, the only savior was the central message in both in the old and new testament but denied in Islam. Gen 3:15 Isa,7:14,9:6,53:1-12,Jn 3: 1Jn 2:22
-Characters of Mohammed betrayed him as a messenger of God but the character of Christ confirmed him as the savior of the world.
- Child abuse was exemplified by the prophet of Islam in the matter of Aisha who was abused by Mohammed at the age of 9 and called it marriage with 53 year old man. This became a sunnah (an example to follow) This proves that Islam is an evil cult.
D.-Divine relation, is accompanied with signs and wonders as demonstrated by the Bible prophets but this is lacking in Islam no proofs that its message was divine
-Demons are made disciples of Mohammed through the preaching of Quran. whereas Demons are cast out of people when the Gospel of Christ is preached.
E.-Experience of Salvation, Sanctification and Holy Ghost Baptism was the basic personal experience or relationship with God and a demand for being a Christian or a child of God. But in Islam it is external show of piety by watching hands legs,ass up facing Blackstone towards Kaaba, and circumbulation of it ,with pagan religious fasting in the month of Rammadan,the pagan tax system of Zakat belief in one imaginary Allah with Mohammed as his partner or puppet gangster
F.-Freedom of faith, worship and choice which is central to Bible base belief system is lacking in Islam, there is no freedom to choose whom to serve. Islam started without given choice to prospecting converts. The only choice is Islam or death or remains a slave and if you wanted to leave Islam you face death sentence. This looks to me as cult. Cult people don’t leave their cult member without a threat of their lives.
-Fruits of Islam all over the world are bad indicating a bad source of inspiration which cannot be the God of the Bible, who said by their fruits you shall know them.
G.- Goodness, godliness, righteousness, honesty, faithfulness are cherished virtues in Christianity but in Islam it is the outward religious rituals that are cherished and respected. You can be a murderer or terrorist, rapist, polygamist, adulterers as long as you keep to your ritual religious duties you are ok
-Gabriel, the angel of revelation of Quran was an ignorant angel who did not know the Mary of Jesus and the Marian of Aaron in the Old Testament, and a lying angel about the death and resurrection of Christ. That Gabriel could not have been the Gabriel of the New Testament.
H.-Heaven is a holy place prepared for holy people no sinner will go there according to the Bible but the Koran depiction of heaven looks like a brothel, gotten ready for the sensual, the polygamist and rapist,
I.-Islam is polytheism rapped in the veil of monotheisms still with pagan rituals untouched The Bible monotheism appears more credible.
J.-Jesus confirmed the Tora, The Psalms and the prophets as the authentic word of God. But Mohammed confirm none, and claim its corruption because it contradict Koran false prophesy.
K.-Knowledge of Old Testament scriptures strengthened faith in Christ as the savior of the world but knowledge in the Bible revelation weakened faith in Mohammed as a prophet
-Ka’aba a pagan house of Idols was sanctified as house of God and worshipped daily by Mohammed which is idolatry and forbidden by Yahweh the God of the Bible.
L.-Law of God is honoured and kept by the Bible prophets but Mohammed broke all the law of God and support the lawlessness with satanic verses he called the Qoran
M.- Man is elevated above the woman and marriage is made easy for man and given a higher earthly and heavenly inheritance than the woman. Islam is a man made religion. While the man enjoy 72 virgins and 2 earthly women in heaven the woman has to share her man with 73 others. The Bible contradict this delusion. There is no marriage in heaven.
-Mohammed could not finish his project of giving Arab a scripture before he died after 23 years of ministry, it was still recitals but Jesus, within 3 of ministry finished his mission and declared it is finished.
N.-No divine power given to work miracles in order to confirm their divine mission. In Islam there is no proof that the message and the messenger are from God. No miracle no wonders no prophesy that came true but the Bible has overwhelming evidences that the message is divine.2Tim3:15-16
- No religious tolerant in Islam. The cult does not allow you to leave it or you die and quench human intellect. Christianity gives liberty to choose. it allow democracy and secularism and human intellectual development.
O.-Obedient to Allah and Mohammed in the Koran is the creed. In the Bible obedience to God only and His word is the ultimate demand.
P.-Purity of life is attainable through faith in the atoning blood of Christ and obedience to God commandment or word. In the Koran purity of life is an external show of aimless religious ritual of washings hands legs and repetitive prayers that are hardly answered.
Q.-Quran is the testimony of one man Mohammed while the Bible is the testimony of more than 40 people. One against 40.
R.-Right Relationship with God through Christ and his righteousness is the Bible requirement for heaven; But in the Koran it is religion and rituals that are condemned in the Bible that determines heaven.
S.-Salvation is free and assured through Christ in the Bible but in the Koran is not free and no assurance through works either.
Self-servicing verses of the Quran indicate a personal agenda of Mohammed rather than a message from the divine.
T.-Terror and threat with hell fire without mercy for the unbelievers seems to be the main message of the Koran but in the Bible it is love of God and his mercy that is made manifest through the gospel of Jesus Christ Jn 3:16
U.-Unbeliever have no liberty to live with the Muslim and enjoy the same facilities except they are converted but all people are the same under the gospel environment no discrimination between believers and unbelievers.
V.-Victim and victors of Islam (those captured by force and those who believe in Islam) have no assurance of salvation But in Christ there is assurance of salvation and eternal life.
-Violence and hatred to unbelievers are made a virtue in Islam whereas it is love that is emphasized in Christianity even to ones enemies.
W.- Women position is very inferior to that of man and women are oppressed beyond measure in Islam but in Christ women are given equal opportunity with men except were positional responsibility count.
X.-Xeroxing the life of Mohammed makes one a terrorist, a polygamist, a murderer or an assassin but Xeroxing the life of Chirist one becomes holy righteous, merciful, compassionate and loving fellow.
Y.-Yielding to Islam teaching leads to economic poverty, spiritual poverty and eternal uncertainty. But yielding to Christ teaching brings happiness economic prosperity, and eternal certainty.
Z. Zainab marriage to Mohammed and the Qoranic revelation approving it is clear evidence that the Qoran is not the word of God. The Zag-ging of the Bible stories and the threat of hell for personal gain was Mohammed method to achieving power, wealth and control of women.
My friend can you see why I could not have been a Muslim? Christ message love forgiveness and mercy is timeless and sufficient to take anyone to heaven. Quran message of hatred and violence and oppression cannot be applied in the modern and civilized world and not even the 7 century Arabia without the force of the sward. Therefore I invite you to new life in Christ.
written by H. , January 18, 2010
The fanatical fundamentalism displayed through the article does not have anything to envy to fanatic fundamentalists in Islam. But beyond these words, here is a quick refutal of it: http://forum.stirpes.net/225689-post6.html
written by Machmoed elchalid , January 22, 2010
A) True, B)False
Answer: B.
Lying is a sin. There were earthquakes long before humans came into existence.
written by Spartacus , January 22, 2010
Thanks for your fine thesis and contribution to learning. The only reason Arab and African countries and Turkey ended slavery was because Great Britain and the U.S. forced them to do so.
While Christian denominations have all lamented and repented European involvement in slave trades, Islam can never do so, because Islam (submission) is a euphemism for slavery. Slavery is inseparable from Islam and according to a hadith, a slave's child will announce the end of the world. This means Islam unconditionally accepts the continuation of slavery.
The animus expressed by respondents to the forum do not surprise me. As Dr. Malek Chebel (L'esclavage en terre d'islam) pointed out, Islamic slavery is a great taboo among Muslims. He advocates they simply admit it and get on with their lives.
Islamists are forced to defend the indefensible by resorting to ad hominems, tu quoque's and other time-wasting fallacies.
Shame on them for supporting slavery.
But here is a problem: Some, notice that I said "some," ex-Muslims who leave Islam, especially if they become atheists, begin to attack all religions as if all religions are at fault at present. This isn't the case for the most part. Let me add that most ex-Muslims are very sensible. They can see what's happening at present. They can see that other religions besides Islam are not causing havoc all over the world. There are some isolated cases where other religions cause a problem, but for the most part that isn't the norm as it is with Islam. So they, the sensible ex-Muslims, stay away from ad hominem attacks on other religions besides Islam. However, this isn't the case with some ex-Muslims. I, too, would appreciate it if they stayed away from other religions since these other religions, for the most part, are not the cause of every day atrocities. I'll prove my argument by pointing out the follow facts:
Who are the suicide bombers? Only Islamists.
What religion or religions approves or approve slavery at present? Only Islam.
What religion relegates women to second class status or worse? Only Islam.
What religion teaches that men are more intelligent than women? Only Islam.
What religion gives women only half their rights? Only Islam.
What religion gives old depraved Muslim male sex perverts to legally kidnap little girls as young as seven years old? Only Islam.
What religion gives old depraved Muslim male sex perverts to legally force little girls to "marry" them? Only Islam.
What religion gives old depraved Muslim male sex perverts to legally rape little girls as young as seven years old? Only Islam. However, old depraved Muslim male sex perverts call it "consummation of marriage." But ask the Muslim little girls, screaming for mercy, if they believe it's "the consummation of marriage." I don't think they would agree. In civilized societies, this injustice is called rape of a child.
What religion gives depraved Muslim male sex perverts the right to have sex with an female infant so "long as Muslim males may not penetrate"? Only Islam. Man, that is really sick, sick, sick.
What religion demands that women must wear an Islamic "tent" called a burqa? Only Islam.
What religion allows adultery through the "back door." Only Islam. Let me explain: When an Arab can afford it, he "marries" a little whore for an overnight stay. When the Muslim Arab is done with her the next morning, he divorces her by saying three times "I divorce you." He next hands the little whore a handful of Arab coins and away the Arab goes. The Muslims don't stone the little whore to death because she "married" the Islamic way.
What religion allows its members to practice hypocrisy? Only Islam.
What religion allows its members to lie? Only Islam.
What religion stones women to death for adultery if women don't first "marry" Islamic style? Only Islam.
What religion lashes women as old as seventy five years if caught in insignificant so-called infractions? Only Islam.
What religion practices honor killings? Only Islam.
What religion allows Muslim male criminals to murder little girls who seek an education? Only Islam.
What religion hangs effeminate males by the neck until dead? Only Islam.
What religion enslaves very young, as young as seven years old, Muslim male jockeys to do the bidding of evil Muslims. Only Islam.
What religion punishes petty thieves by cutting off their hands, feet, and gouging out eyes? Only Islam.
Do you see what I mean? So some, yes, some, of you ex-Muslims, especially those who become atheists, please don't attack all religions as if they were all like Islam. They're not. Perhaps you feel like attacking all religions because you were caught in the tentacles of hateful Islam. So please stay on course and destroy your former religion that wasn't really a religion. Islam is a killing machine that was initiated for the express purpose to destroy especially human beings. Don't be bitter because you were once Islamic. Give thanks that you could see the mistakes of Islam. Stay on course and destroy Islam. Don't take it out on all religions which are very different than Islam. Thanks.