Answering Islam - A Christian-Muslim dialog



By Silas

Part one, Is ISIS Islamic, Part 1 compared and contrasted the kingdom’s of Jesus and Muhammad and presented their differences in terms of morality, method, and goal.  The differences are significant and in some cases diametrical.  Jesus taught non-violence and reproved His disciples for trying to make Him king.  They did so because they believed the Messiah was to set up and establish an earthly kingdom.  But that was not Jesus’s plan:  “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:6).  Muhammad was also non-violent initially and his mission was only to warn men of Allah’s judgment:  “And those who disbelieve say: Why has not a sign been sent down upon him from his Lord? You are only a warner and a guide for every people,” (13:7).  But when his circumstances changed and he had a dedicated body of fighting men at his disposal, Allah changed both the mission and methods and commanded him to fight to establish and spread his kingdom:  “I have been commanded by Allah to fight men…”. Muhammad had a mission and goal and he fought and won.  Muhammad’s trail of blood grew wide.

Part one also showed that Muhammad’s actions, teachings, and doctrine establish established violence as a legitimate means to an end.  Following Muhammad’s death the subsequent Caliphs, who also held Muhammad’s cause and goal, naturally used violence to subject non-Muslims to Islam’s rule and to force those that left Islam back into the fold by the point of the sword.  They also used violence against one another as one Muslim leader tried to force other Muslims to submit to his Islamic rule.  Those that refused, Muslim or non-Muslim, were killed.

In this day ISIS has established itself as a caliphate, an Islamic religious-political kingdom.  They’ve accomplished this through the use of arms; striving in Allah’s cause (jihad).  They’ve shed their own blood and many of them gave their lives for Islam’s, i.e. Muhammad’s, goal.  ISIS’s roads pave over the bodies of Shia Muslims, non-aligned Sunni Muslims, Christians, Yazidi’s, and others.  A wide array of atrocities accompanies ISIS:  murders, rapes, tortures, massacres, pillaging.  Destruction, death, and decay are their primary fruit.   Thus far they have had victories and defeats. 

They may succeed in the long run or they may crumble due to both internal conflict and battlefield defeat.  Pundits left and right predict ISIS’s ultimate failure.  Perhaps they are right, but no one can deny that the dream of a restored Caliphate lives in the hearts and minds of millions of Muslims.  This is not a “miniscule” number.  Tens of thousands of young Muslims, rich or poor, from around the world have travelled to Iraq and Syria to join them.  The attraction to Islam’s goal is clear and strong and many young Muslim men and women are willing to kill others and die fighting for Muhammad’s cause.

And once again this latest round of Islamic violence brings Islam to the forefront and people ask “Are ISIS’s actions truly Islamic?”  “Do they represent real Islam?”  “Would Muhammad approve of this?”  These same questions have been asked before:  for the 9/11 hijackers, for England’s 7/7 suicide bombers, for Spain’s train bombers, for the Indonesian bombers in Bali, for the Muslims who murdered children at Beslan, for Major Nidal Hasan, for the many lone wolf Muslim terrorists who have murdered people throughout the West.  “Are this groups actions Islamic?”  This is perhaps the ad nauseam question of the last 15 years for those who have queried Islam.

You would think that by now the stupidity and willful ignorance of Western peoples in addressing this question would have long been vanquished in the face of the ever growing evidence.  Sadly that is not the case.  Foolish and ignorant people, including Christians, act as a “band of babbling, bumbling, baboons,” (J. K. Rowling), defending Islam as peaceful and decrying ISIS as religious deviants, or non-Islamic.

There is no lack of contrarians in the West.  So let me ask you, the reader, to figure out an answer for yourself: “How much blood is it going to take, how many in-depth explanations of Islamic doctrines of violence are needed, how many broken bodies are required before you get it?”  For those proud, blind, and arrogant die-hards I fear the answer is blowing in the wind.




Begin with the simple definition of “Islamic.”  There are good online definitions.  Mine is: “that which conforms to the Quran, imitates Muhammad’s life, and obeys Islam’s laws.” 

However, more detailed criteria are needed to arrive at a confident yes or no answer for “Is ISIS Islamic?”

We need a standard, an “Islamic measurement standard,” to compare ISIS against, and evaluate if ISIS is aligned with, or contradicts, that standard.

Muhammad should be the “Islamic measurement standard.”  Was there ever a greater Muslim than Muhammad?  Is there anyone more worthy for Muslims to imitate?  Of course not!  Muslims are commanded to imitate Muhammad’s lifestyle and obey Muhammad (Quran 3:132 and 33:21).  Muhammad embodied Islam and Muhammad practiced what he preached.  Muhammad obeyed his Allah faithfully.  Additionally his closest friends and devotees, his “Companions,” those men that knew him best, certainly understood his commands and we can also look to their actions to understand what he had commanded.

Wouldn’t it then make sense to use Muhammad, and by this I mean his teachings, actions, and doctrine, as our Islamic measurement standard?  Wouldn’t it be logical to correlate ISIS’s actions with these and determine if ISIS conforms? 

Muhammad’s teachings, actions, and doctrines are found in the Islamic source materials: the Quran, hadith, and sira.  These have been studied and codified as Islamic theology.  You could obtain “The Reliance of the Traveller,” in English, if you wish to understand this in some depth.

If you’re familiar with these Islamic source materials these questions are not difficult to answer.  Muhammad’s life and teachings are not only well recorded; they are some of the best documented records of any great religious teacher.  There are far more details available about Muhammad’s life than there are about Jesus’s, Moses’s, and Buddha’s.

Muhammad:  can you think of a more strict, more rigorous, more robust Islamic standard for us to use to measure ISIS against?




ISIS claims to be obeying Muhammad and Allah and practicing a more pure form of Islam.  Critics acknowledge this and say derisively that ISIS wants to return the Muslim world to practicing a “7th century form of Islam,” i.e. Muhammad’s form of Islam.  (Do these critics realize how self-defeating that statement is with respect to convincing Muslims that ISIS is wrong?).  For just as Muhammad struggled (jihad) to establish a physical domain of Islamic theo-political rule through the use of violence, so too ISIS struggles to establish a similar domain.


The initial question is “Are ISIS’s soldiers Muslims?”  Yes or no?  To become a Muslim one needs to have faith in Allah, accept Muhammad’s prophethood, believe in the angels, prophets, the final judgment, etc.  One recites the “shahada” as a profession of faith and the initial conversion process is complete.  This process has happened many times in England and Muslims have trumpeted that this new convert has “reverted” to Islam.

Thereafter a new Muslim will strive to learn about his faith, study the Quran and Islam’s teachings, endeavor to fulfill and obey Islam’s “five pillars,” and many other religious rules, etc. I don’t think anyone would deny that ISIS’s men and women have fulfilled this initial process. 

The “five pillars of Islam” broadens our scope.  These are the foundational acts, or works, which define one as a Muslim and show subjection to Islam.

1.    Shahadah: declaring there is no god except God, and Muhammad is God's Messenger

2.    Salat: ritual prayer five times a day

3.    Zakat: giving 2.5% of one’s savings to the poor and needy

4.    Sawm: fasting and self-control during the holy month of Ramadan

5.    Hajj: pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in a lifetime if one is able

I don’t think it is necessary to consider if ISIS’s soldiers meet these aspects of their faith.  Certainly they’ve professed the shahadah, certainly they pray.  I’m assuming that they try to perform the other three duties as they are able.  I’m not arguing that they are perfect Muslims.  I am saying that they are real Muslims.

Even Muslim critics of ISIS agree that they are Muslims.  These critics call them fundamentalist Muslims, Salafi Muslims, Wahhabi Muslims, Islamists, radicals, jihadis, etc., but Muslims none the less.  People who know about Islam grant that ISIS:  a) believes in the simple theological requirements like professing the Shahada and believing in the great Unity and power of Allah, and,  b) performs the basic physical actions of praying, giving alms to those they feel are fellow Muslims, fasting, and going on Hajj.  Some criticize their tactics and actions and say that they are doing non-Islamic things, but they are indeed true Muslims.  In fact, some prominent Muslims, (e.g. Ed Hussein of the New York Times, and Reza Aslan), admit that what ISIS does is found in the Quran and established by Muhammad’s life.  Critics like Hussein just want to innovate or reform Islamic theology to make it kinder and gentler and move it away from the Islam that Muhammad practiced.  I hope he succeeds.

Perhaps these ISIS Muslims are doing things that are not in accordance with Islam but perhaps they are.  Either way it is important to first understand and recognize that the ISIS Muslims are indeed real Muslims.

Not only can we categorize ISIS as true Muslims, we could do the same for most of the Muslim terrorists we have seen in the last 20 years.  Perhaps they are misguided but they are sincere, dedicated, and true Muslims.  Don’t overlook the fact that many of these Muslims have given the ultimate sacrifice: they gave their lives in service to their faith.  That cannot be said about the blowhard Muslim academics that dwell in the comfort and luxury of university academia or cushy jobs in the West, (as well as some of the Mideast’s academics and professional clergy as well).




Are ISIS’s actions Islamic or in accordance with real Islam?  Let’s detail ISIS’s most grievous, inhuman, and cruel, actions:

1)  They have murdered many non-Muslims.  This includes Yazidis, Christians, and atheists.  They did this via shootings, torture, beheadings, and other methods or execution.

2)  They have murdered other Muslims whom they felt opposed them or who were not true Muslims, i.e. they were viewed as apostates.

3)  They have taken females as prisoners and raped them.

4)  They have killed children

5)  They have commanded Christians to pay jizya (a religious extortion tax), convert to Islam, or be killed.

Of course ISIS has committed many more violent crimes and I’ll list a few more of them, but we’ll start with these five. 

Now we’ll compare these five actions against our Islamic Standard:  Muhammad.

1)  ISIS murders non-Muslims:  Muhammad murdered non-Muslims.  Muhammad even ordered that slave girls be murdered for making fun of him.  See these articles: 

Muhammad's Dead Poet Society 

The Murder of Abu Afak 

The Murder of Ibn Sunayna 

2)  ISIS kills Muslims whom they consider to be false Muslims, or apostates:  Muhammad ordered apostates to be killed.  (Bukhari, volume 9, #17).

Muhammad did not murder other Muslims but he did command that apostates were to be executed.  Following his death many Muslims no longer wanted to pay religious tax.  They believed in Islam but didn’t want to be forced to pay money.  The Caliph, Abu Bakr, viewed them as apostates and made war upon them.  These are known as the Ridda wars (wars of apostasy).  He killed tens of thousands.

A handful of years later Islam suffered two civil wars.  The first was between Ali vs Aisha, Talha, and Zubayr.  Ali had conspired with fellow Muslims to murder the Caliph Uthman (the man who issued today’s official version of the Quran).  Thereafter Ali seized power and demanded submission.  The others rejected Ali and some suspected him of the crime.  Each side declared the other apostate.  The conflict climaxed with Ali winning the “Battle of the Camel” in which between 10 to 20 thousand Muslims died. 

Not long thereafter the 2nd civil war broke out between Ali and Muawiya (Abu Sufyan’s son).  Again each side declared the other as apostate.  This time, tens of thousands of Muslims were killed by fellow Muslims.  The climax, “The Battle of Siffin” ended up as a stalemate more or less.  Later, Ali himself was murdered by fellow Muslims.

I argue that ISIS views the Shia, and other Muslims who oppose them, as apostates or renegades, and are only doing, more or less, what Abu Bakr, Ali, Aisha, etc. have done before.  These people knew Muhammad and Islam best and they practiced what Muhammad taught them.

Finally there was civil war between Ali’s son Hussein, (Muhammad’s grandson), and Muawiya’s son Yazid.  Hussein led a very small force against Yazid’s army and was virtually wiped out.  Hussein’s head was cut off and his body was stabbed repeatedly and trampled by horses.  His head was presented to Yazid and he and his men mocked it and poked it with sticks, until they were reproved by one of their older companions who said, “I have seen Muhammad kiss those lips.”   In typical Shakespearian justice, Muhammad’s arch enemy’s grandson, Yazid, sat on Islam’s throne and crushed Muhammad’s grandson under his feet.

See these articles:

Muhammad's Order to Kill Apostates 

Ali versus Aisha

Ali versus Muawiya 

3)  ISIS attacks and captures females and rapes them:  Muhammad allowed female slaves to be raped because they were “property.”  In fact, Tabari records that Muhammad had sex with his slave Mariyam because she was his “property.”  See these articles:

Slave Women in Islam  

Women in Islam  

4)  ISIS has deliberately murdered children:  Muhammad did not deliberately murder children and he commanded against it.  When he captured children he enslaved them and sold them as needed but he did not massacre them as ISIS has done.  Muhammad also allowed the incidental killing of children during battle, but again, this is not what ISIS is doing.  In this case I would say that ISIS is doing something un-Islamic and against Muhammad’s commands.

Muhammad did establish the law of “retaliation or retribution” (qisas), which allows Muslims to enact “an eye for an eye” retaliation (2:178, 16:126).  Perhaps ISIS claims this right because non-Muslims have bombed their cities and killed their children.  But as I understand the Quran and the teaching from “The Reliance of the Traveller” I see no justification for what ISIS is doing to children. 

On a side note, ISIS did burn that Jordanian pilot to death.  They could claim “qisas” and perhaps they have a point there.  But I see no way possible for ISIS to justify their killing of children.  It is not Islamic and it contravenes Muhammad’s/Allah’s commands.

5)  ISIS commanded Christians to pay the extortion tax “jizya” or be killed.  Muhammad commanded the same exact thing (9:29).  He also threatened Christian communities with the same.  See the “Aylah” section in this article: Real Islam, Violence, and Sheila Musaji 

Here are a few other similarities between ISIS and Muhammad:

ISIS uses the sword to spread their kingdom, so did Muhammad.  See The Verse of the Sword

ISIS massacres and beheads hundreds of prisoners, so did Muhammad.  See  Muhammad and the Massacre of the Qurayza Jews  

ISIS tortures people, so did Muhammad.  See

Torture and Death of the Shepherds 

Torture and Death of Kinana 

ISIS is expelling non-Muslims from their ancestral lands, so did Muhammad.  Muhammad ordered that eventually all Jews and Christians were to be expelled from the Arabian Peninsula.  Umar completed this task.

Narrated Said bin Jubair:

Ibn 'Abbas said, "Thursday! What (great thing) took place on Thursday!" Then he started weeping till his tears wetted the gravels of the ground . Then he said, "On Thursday the illness of Allah's Apostle was aggravated and he said, "Fetch me writing materials so that I may have something written to you after which you will never go astray." The people (present there) differed in this matter and people should not differ before a prophet. They said, "Allah's Apostle is seriously sick.' The Prophet said, "Let me alone, as the state in which I am now, is better than what you are calling me for." The Prophet on his death-bed, gave three orders saying, "Expel the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, respect and give gifts to the foreign delegates as you have seen me dealing with them."  I forgot the third (order)" (Ya'qub bin Muhammad said, "I asked Al-Mughira bin 'Abdur-Rahman about the Arabian Peninsula and he said, 'It comprises Mecca, Medina, Al-Yama-ma and Yemen." Ya'qub added, "And Al-Arj, the beginning of Tihama.")  Sahih Bukhari, volume 4, #288

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

Umar bin Al-Khattab expelled all the Jews and Christians from the land of Hijaz. Allah's Apostle after conquering Khaibar, thought of expelling the Jews from the land which, after he conquered it belonged to Allah, Allah's Apostle and the  Muslims. But the Jews requested Allah's Apostle to leave them there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits (the land would yield). Allah's Apostle said, "We shall keep you on these terms as long as we wish." Thus they stayed till the time of 'Umar's Caliphate when he expelled them to Taima and Ariha.  Sahih Bukhari, volume 4, #380

ISIS uses collective punishment, so did Muhammad.
 See these articles:

Muhammad and the Jews  

ISIS destroys pagan religious sites:  Muhammad had pagan religious sites be destroyed.  For example, see:

ISIS forces people to choose between converting to Islam or being killed, so did Muhammad.  See:



Muhammad helped fellow Muslims.  ISIS helps those they consider fellow Muslims.  This link describes how ISIS is trying to help fellow Muslims:


The story of ISIS governance that has unfolded in Mosul since June 10th shows a militant organization that is also capable of implementing basic government functions but does not yet demonstrate how durable that governance structure is. Alongside ISIS’s implementation of Shari’a law, ISIS provides food rations and a form of rent control to try and appease residents; …

You can also see this on Youtube:

Some critics of ISIS have a hard time accepting that ISIS actually helps fellow Muslims.  But if you understand Islam you’ll know that charity towards fellow Muslims (not non-Muslims), and care for Muslim (not non-Muslims) poor is a primary command in Islam.  Of course ISIS tries to help their fellow Muslims, just as Muhammad did.

(In a similar fashion Al-Qaeda is trying to help the persecuted Muslims of Myanmar and asked Muslim nations to take in their fellow Muslim refugees.)




There are hundreds of denouncements of ISIS as “un-Islamic.”  These range from Muslim scholars to Westerners, including Christians.  I’ve yet to read one of these that compares and contrasts ISIS’s crimes with Muhammad’s crimes. 

The “ISIS is not Islamic” arguments are based on two legs:

1) cherry picking from the Quran, Muhammad’s statements, and select scholar’s quotes.  It is easy to make anyone look good, or bad, when you only present one facet of their words or deeds.  Even the atheist Mao Tse Tung helped some struggling Chinese.  If that is all you knew about him you might think him a decent man.  Instead Mao the atheist is the greatest mass murderer in history.

2) the second leg is a variation of “All the Islamic scholars declare ISIS is not Islamic and the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful,  therefore ISIS is not Islamic.”

For example here are two of the scholarly articles that cherry-pick:

The Scholar's Letter to Baghdadi  The Scholar’s Letter to Baghdadi

Terrorists and their Quranic Delusions 

These articles are written and translated primarily for a Western audience.  Their authors fail to mention Muhammad’s violent and hideous crimes.  They decry what ISIS does but ignore what Muhammad did.

For example the first article states on page 1: “Jihad in Islam is defensive war”.  Only a liar and/or ignorant person would make such a claim.  Even the benign Wikipedia states it is to expand the Islamic state:

The primary aim of jihad as warfare is not the conversion of non-Muslims to Islam by force, but rather the expansion and defense of the Islamic state. In theory, jihad was to continue until "all mankind either embraced Islam or submitted to the authority of the Muslim state." There could be truces before this was achieved, but no permanent peace.

The “Reliance of the Traveller”1 states:  [Section o9.0, page 599]

"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word "mujahada", signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self, (nafs), which is why the Prophet said as he was returning from jihad, "We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad."

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

1) Fighting is prescribed for you (2:216)

2) Slay them wherever you find them (4:89)

3) Fight the idolaters utterly (9:36)

and such Hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said:

"I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah."

Historical facts show that within 100 years of Muhammad’s death Muslims attacked, conquered, and created one of the world’s largest empires.  Jihad by no means was defensive warfare.  Jihad was the primary, offensive means, by which Muslims created their empires.  Muhammad commanded Muslims to attack and conquer non-Muslims, and Christians and Jews. 

Another erroneous example on page one states:  “17- It is forbidden in Islam to torture people” yet they do not address the people that Muhammad tortured.

These authors do what they accuse ISIS of:  they cherry-pick parts of the Quran and Muhammad’s life.  But ISIS takes the whole of Muhammad’s life and applies it.  Yes, at times Muhammad was kind and merciful, but at times he was cruel and brutal.  His kindness does not dismiss or modify his brutality.  All war criminals have probably been kind at times; this does not relieve them of their guilt.

When Muslim scholars are too deceitful to quote Muhammad in scope then you know that they are deceiving the Western audience intentionally and playing them for fools.  They have luxurious success because Western journalists and academics are either too cowardly (Lawrence Pintak), too bigoted (Juan Cole), or too ignorant (see Jack Jenkins below), to challenge them with facts about Muhammad and Islam.

Interestingly, another scholar critiques the first article here:

Muslim Scholars versus ISIS 

Also, there are a few Muslim clerics, in America, who support ISIS.  Here is one example:

Dearborn Cleric

Here is an example of the second leg argument by Jack Jenkins and Igor Volsky:

Why ISIS is in Fact Not Islamic

Virtually every single American Muslim organization has publicly disavowed both the ideology and the practices of ISIS, and just hours before Obama’s address, dozens of Muslim American clerics and community leaders distanced their religion from the beliefs of the terrorist extremists.


… the vast majority of believers worked or are working to disavow the actions of fanatics and preserve the core, peaceful principles of their faith — just as Muslims are now doing with ISIS.

American Muslim groups are speaking out and condemning ISIS as not-Islamic.  So what?  What would you expect them to do?  Of course many are sincere but some are doing so only for “dawa’s” sake (take CAIR for example).  They are striving for acceptance in America and they want to win converts and supporting ISIS is not the way to accomplish that.  Many Muslims publically condemn Islamic terrorism but to this day Muslims across America hold private parties to celebrate their victory of 9/11.  I applaud Muslim groups and individual Muslims who condemn ISIS.  Unfortunately they are not credible because they cannot anchor their denouncement in Islamic doctrine.  They practice an innovated and deformed form of Islam, (like Shiela Musaji), or they are saying what you want to hear, (like CAIR).

If you want to see this very argument carried out in Arabic see:

The devout Muslim makes the same points I make, that ISIS is doing what is permitted in Islamic law.  On the other hand, the Kurd who is arguing against him can only make a humanistic argument because he knows that Muhammad did what ISIS does.

For the record, there are Muslim scholars and clerics who support, or practice, what ISIS does.  Some may not come out and proclaim, “I support ISIS” but these scholars proclaim the Islamic laws that ISIS follows.  Here is an article in which Muslim scholars, (one teaches at Vanderbilt), proclaim brutal Islamic law towards homosexuals:

Islam Executing Homosexuals

The other flaw in Jenkin’s argument, that the vast majority of Muslims are peace loving, should be rejected harshly because sharia permits much, but not all, of what ISIS is doing today.  The vast majority of Muslims in the world today want sharia: Muslims wanting Sharia

This article details that there are notable percentages, if not an outright majority, of Muslims who favor aspects of harsh sharia application.  This covers topics like death for apostates, suicide bombing, punishments for homosexuality, honor killings, physical punishments for theft, and rejection of Western culture.

If you want to look deeper into this, here is an article that guts Jenkin’s argument thoroughly:  Muslim Opinion Polls

The polls show that Muslim support for violence is strong, not weak.  In light of the evidence that is so easily obtainable in less than 60 seconds, why is it allowable for Harvard to produce such crappy theology grads?




ISIS is certainly Islamic.  They’re led by and comprised of mostly professing Muslims, and most of their actions, not all, are in accordance with Allah’s law.

No one should count their few “non-Islamic” actions as disqualifiers.  Even during Muhammad’s time Muslims under his command went beyond what he commanded in brutality.  Muhammad reproached them strongly (for example Khalid ibn Walid) but they were still considered Muslim.  No one familiar with Islam’s early history would denounce Khalid as “non-Islamic.”  They would only agree with Muhammad and criticize Khalid’s “non-Islamic” murders.

Yes, even with their few “non-Islamic” enormities ISIS is certainly Islamic.

Muhammad’s “kingdom of Allah,” like ISIS’s domain, was an earthly, physical, and religious kingdom.  It was powerful, spread primarily by the sword, and it was one of the largest kingdoms in mankind’s history.  ISIS is continuing Muhammad’s mission and doing most of the same things Muhammad did.

What was Muhammad’s mission?  His primary mission was to establish Allah’s kingdom on earth:

“…the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.”  Sahih Muslim, vol. 1 #33

The context of this hadith proves that Muhammad was speaking of physical war against non-Muslims.  The Quran texts of 9:5 and 9:29 reinforce this.

Imagine if God, the creator of the universe, spoke to you clearly and commanded you to make war on other people unless they converted or submitted to your rule.  If God was telling you to do something you had damn-well better do it.  Muhammad did it.  His followers do it.

Muhammad threatened you by command of God.  Muhammad’s threat is being carried out by his followers today.  ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and many other Muslim groups, and individuals, are obeying Muhammad and fighting men until they bow the knee to Islam.  And that’s the way it is, and has been, since Muhammad’s time.

When an honest person examines Muhammad’s track record, recorded in the sira and hadith, he could only conclude that ISIS is doing much of what Muhammad did.  No other logical conclusion can be made:  ISIS is Islamic.




What can you do to help?  Here are my suggestions:

1) “The harvest is plenty but the laborers are few.”  Get involved with and support local ministries that practice outreach to Muslims.  Muslims worldwide are turning to Christ now!  Many Muslims have seen and tasted the poison of Muhammad’s Islam and have spit it out.  A harvest if being reaped.  You, your skills, your hands, your expertise, are needed.  Don’t be content to be a sideline, non-contributing, Christian.  Get involved and help!

2) “Study (be diligent) to show thyself approved.”  Do your homework.  Don’t just take my word for it.  Read the Quran, hadith, and sira.  Learn for yourself the evil things Muhammad did and taught.

3) Speak out against Islam’s falsehood.  Muhammad was a false prophet, who preached a false message, about a false god.  Christianity’s God is not the same as Islam’s God.

4)  There is a great need for British and American journalists and academics to present Muhammad’s evil actions.  Journalists need to step up and present the other side of the story.  I’m NOT talking about creating caricatures or flinging insults.  I’m talking about real journalists being brave enough to state the facts, the crimes Muhammad committed.  Until today’s journalists and academics engage fairly, then only one side, the banal and benign side, of Islam will be presented.



May 25th, 2015

Continue with Part 3: Understanding Islam and ISIS Today


[1] al-Misri, Ahmad, “Reliance of the Traveler”, (A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law), translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, published by Amana publications, Beltsville, Maryland, USA 1991

[First published: 20 October 2015]
[Last updated: 20 October 2015]