"___ "You confuse Muslim-ology with the study of Islam."

Bingo.

Just one quibble, however. Why not state that Islam has THREE experts, Allah, Gabriel, and Muhammad? To construe Islamic expertise in this way would be useful for teaching the ignorant, e.g. "Friend", about the rudiments of Islam and about its founder's alleged mystical experiences. And surely if Islam were true, Gabriel would be one of its experts.

"Say, 'Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - it is [none but] he who has brought the Qur'an down upon your heart, [O Muhammad], by permission of Allah , confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers.' "

-Koran 2:97 (http://quran.com/2)"

"This headline is so true. Mercy to the guilty is in fact cruelty and rape of the innocents. I am a survivor and I know the pain islam has caused to non muslims so I appreciate your title."

"Denial kills and so many are in denial about the truth of islam."

"Your analysis of Islam is correct. Your list of those who should oppose Islam appears limited to devotees of other religions. As if religious belief were inevitable, and choosing any other major religion is necessarily OK.

The elephant in your room? You forget we are all humans, and everything we do is a product of our human nature interacting with external reality. We achieve good through fulfillment of our human potential. We may know reality through the use of our human reason. Therefore humanism is the proper answer to religion gone murderous.

By offering up competing religions as the antidote, you put yourself in a weak position in relation to the threat. Like the"me too" Republicans who offer a discounted version of "socialism" (thuggism), as if they were merchants in a bazaar offering their shopworn goods for 10% less than the competition."

"Islam's political ideology must be understood if the events in the Middle East are to be understood.

It is impossible to reach correct conclusions about the past and current Middle East conflicts without a true understanding of the non-whitewashed, non-sugar-coated Sunna and utterances of Muhammad.

Such a true understanding will disclose Islam's intrinsic imperialistic, supremacist ideology that developed in the Medinan era. It is that ideology and its appendages that cause the perpetual problems in the Middle East and prevent true peace from growing.

If Islam's intrinsic ideology is softened, true peace can grow. No true peace can grow in the presence of imperialism and supremacism.

The problem is the ideology that controls the people. The problem is not the people themselves. Genetics is not the problem."

""Great" muslim inventions:
Muhammad, founder of Islam and author of Koran, was mentally sick psychopath and pedophile, he had married a 6-year old girl and raped her when she was 9. Muhammad could not read and write. While in seizure, he uttered disjointed phrases, which his followers represented as Allah divine afflatus. This is the history of Islam that muslims and “honest and free” western media would not like you to know. These facts show that islam is not a religion, but a cult.
Read: “History of Middle Ages” Professor Nikolay A. Osokin, Textbook (in Russian), Publishing house: Imperial University Printing Office, Kazan, 1888, 771 pp.; Publisher: ACT, Harvest, Moscow, 2008, 672 pp. (reprint)
In his Cairo speech, Obama accredited to arabs all fundamental inventions human race made over centuries. None of the Obama mentioned is true, as every person graduated from credible high school knows. However, it does not mean that arabs, great nation with centuries of history, has no inventions critical for human life. They have and here they are:
1. Ethnic Cleansing - invented centuries ago, implemented over 2000 years ago in Israel when they occupied Israel and disseminated Jews around the world; from 1948 through 1953 arab countries expelled a million Jews and stole their properties; in 1974, Turkish armed forces invaded Cyprus, captured 36 percent of its territory, partitioned the island, implemented a policy of “ethnic cleansing” and sent close to 200,000 Greek Cypriots southward as refugees who lost their property, desecrated churches and cemeteries, and in 1983 declared the northern Turkish Republic of Cyprus; in 1999, Kosovo Liberation Army stormed homes of the last 15 Jews in Kosovo’s capital, who had to clear out, with just the clothes on their backs; recently, Jews in Yemen were under attack and have been relocated to Britain.
2. Genocide – invented by Turks and implemented in 1915–1917 in Armenia: over 1.5 mln. Armenians, including children, died. Currently, Turkey commits Kurdish Genocide: In 1937–1938, approximately 50,000–70,000 Alevi Kurds were killed. In 1990, Turkish military virtually wiped from the map 3,000 Kurdish villages in Turkey, representing the displacement of more than 378,000 people. Turkey denies Kurdish right for independence, self-determination and all human rights and continues killing Kurds on daily basis in Turkey, Iraq and Syria.
3. Holocaust – invented by Haj Amin al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, in 1920s in Palestine (occupied territory of the State of Israel); implemented in Palestine in 1920s-30s; in 1941, Haj Amin al Husseini brought the Holocaust idea to Hitler and helped him to implement Holocaust in Europe 1941-45; he organized in Europe two islamofascist brigades that operated under SS control, had their own concentration camp, and killed tens of thousand of Europeans, including Jews.
Islam is based on three fundamental principles:
1. Stealing
2. Killing, and
3. Lying
Koran says:
"Slay them wherever you find them. Fight against them till idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme" (Sura 2:190),
"Seek out your enemies relentlessly" (Sura 4:103),
"Make war on them till idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme" (Sura 8:36),
"When the sacred months are over slay the unbelievers wherever you find them. Arrest them, beseige them and lie in ambush everywhere for them" (Sura 9:5),
"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you" (Sura 9:121),
"When you meet the unbelievers on the battlefield strike off their heads" (Sura 47:3),
"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate" (Sura 66:7).
Koran is Islamic Mein Kamf. Islam is fascist cult and must be eliminated from the earth."

"The heartrending effusion "oh my God" followed by earnest and most sincere corrections is one I have seen a few times before this, accompanied by a claim to be a Christian, a claim I have always considered to be quite doubtful.
But then, there ARE some Christians who watch the Muslim strictness re apostates and the totality of religion in daily matters with some envy, and they are willing to defend Islam from the simple dictum that any religion is better than no religion."

"Keep up the good work, Mr Warner. Kind regards, Jim."

"Thanks but No Thanks to Islamic culture

In his 2009 Cairo speech,US President Barack Hussein Obama said, “Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

He neglected to mention that Islam also gave us the barbaric female genital mutilation, honor killings, unrestricted rape of women captives or those considered immorally dressed, stoning for the crime of adultery, limb amputations for theft, murder for leaving their religion, murder for offending their religion, sex with children, sex with animals, sex with dead people, modern day slavery, unrestricted savage acts of terrorism in the name of jihad,instituting second class status for non Muslims and on and on and on.

Obama also stated that the "future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

Surely he forgot that Islam slanders and blasphemes every other Religion.

Hopefully the future will belong to those that reveal Islam for what it really is and stop it's aim of global domination. If not then there is no future for humanity as we know it."

"Finally! President Obama has just called Egyptian President Morsi on the Koranic slanders of 'pigs and apes'. I applaud the courage to denounce Islamic bigotry.

One can hope President Obama will start reading the CSPI website and learn about foundational Islam, rather than mere Muslim-ology!

CSPI is essential reading for all politicians."

"When Muhammad and his companions -- during their years in power at Medina -- called the "unbelievers" to accept Islam, they expected the intimidated people to either convert to Islam or fight. Muhammad's intimidating way was not the quiet way in which the true God of love works with people when calling and drawing them unto Himself.

That is one of several reasons why I assert that Muhammad was a confused man who did not exhibit the marks of a true prophet of the true God of love. He was mistaken about his own prophet-hood, and hundreds of millions of other people have paid an exorbitant price for that mistake.

I have drawn similar conclusions about other so-called prophets after Muhammad, who were also mistaken. All so-called prophets who came after Jesus the Savior were unnecessary. Jesus had already done everything that was needed for the redemption of humankind, hundreds of years earlier. As Jesus Himself said, "It is finished."

Jesus completed everything that was necessary for the redemption of the world when he was born as had been predicted centuries beforehand in the Old Testament, when He lived a perfect life, when He was unjustly crucified and put to death, when He was resurrected from the dead in a glorified body, and when He then ascended to His place of glory where He is now the refuge and strength for all people who will rely on Him, trust Him and cling to Him.

Muhammad should have simply learned the true story of Jesus the Savior, and then he should have told that true story to people, as any Christian missionary does and as the apostles of Jesus had done hundreds of years earlier. And then Muhammad should have let God work in His own time with the people to bring them to a position of trust in Himself; but Muhammad didn't do that. Muhammad's way was not the way of the true God of love.

Muhammad was mistaken, even as many other misguided people throughout history have been mistaken when they have tried to force other people to convert to their way of thinking, with disastrous results. Muhammad was not alone in making that mistake. It reminds me of the re-education camps that have been created by totalitarian rulers for political dissidents.

Forced conversions are not real. All they do is pump up the pride of the misguided one who is doing the forcing. Muhammad didn't understand the gentle calling and drawing of people that the true God of love does; or if he did understand it, he accepted the bolstering of his pride after observing all of the rapid conversions to his Islam. Rapid conversions didn't prove anything about the intrinsic value of Islam itself. It only proved that intimidation worked to superficially re-educate people."

"Below is a clarified, improved version of the last paragraph in my previous post:

Forced conversions are not real. They don't bring people into real, personal relationships with the true God. All they can do is pump up the pride and self-confidence of the misguided one who is doing the forcing.

Muhammad apparently didn't understand the gentle calling and drawing of people that the true God of love does; or if he did understand it, he apparently chose to bypass God's method and use intimidation instead in order to achieve rapid conversions to his Islam, perhaps resulting in the elevation of his own pride and self-confidence at the success of his personal method.

Rapid conversions didn't prove anything about the intrinsic value of Islam itself. They only proved that intimidation worked to superficially re-educate people."

"I re-read two, very-long discussions that I had first read at least once some months ago. They are extremely valuable for many reasons. They reveal thought processes and discussion methods of both Muslim and non-Muslim experts.

You will encounter superb wit, bulletproof logic, absurd argument, sidetracking, apology, accusation, hyper-wordiness, and even great intellectual humor in places. I sometimes laughed heartily at the interchanges.

Bill's explanations are crystal-clear. You will appreciate and be impressed by what he and Jamie and Robert and Abul state.

1) http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-fictional-mohammed/

2) http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/a-new-koran/"

"Muslim people falsely believe that the Qur'an is intrinsically perfect and universal, and was divinely sent down to Muhammad, and has forever been preserved without error. That view is sweetly-sentimental but not realistic.

Competent, scholarly, referenced research that was completed more than a century ago -- using many historical documents from many cultures -- revealed that the Qur'an was not divinely sent down to Muhammad as he claimed.

When I searched for the word "derivative" on this website (using the SEARCH box in the upper-right corner), I found within many articles a statement similar to:
"The only original ideas found in the Koran are that Mohammed is the prophet of Allah and if you do not believe it jihad can be used to convince you. Everything else is derivative."
That particular statement is found at http://www.politicalislam.com/store/six-views-of-islam/product/the-sources-of-islam/ The year-1901 printed book -- shown at that location -- can be read online or downloaded as a PDF file.

The same 1901 book can be read online or downloaded at http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Tisdall/Sources0/index.htm

The 1905 updated version of that 1901 book is a much-longer document. It can be read online or downloaded at http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Tisdall/Sources/index.htm

I read the 1905 version of Tisdall's book in its entirety. Many existing religious ideas -- including heretical ones that Christians have rejected as being inconsistent with the truth about Jesus the Messiah -- were apparently available to Muhammad from many sources, and he apparently used them to progressively create his Islam as he desired or saw fit.

It appears to me that Muhammad became strongly convinced that some beliefs and activities in his world needed to be fixed. In attempting to fix those beliefs and activities to make his world better, it appears to me that Muhammad progressively came to believe that "the end justifies the means." Muhammad's morality slid downhill, and he dragged the morality of other people downhill with him. Trying to bring people into alignment with his version of monotheism by means of threats and violent jihad was appallingly-misguided. The end did not justify the means. Both the end and the means were tragedies. If he wanted to fix things in his world, he needed to operate according to the golden rule, but he did not do that.

The following insightful, extremely-candid (non-dhimmi, non-politically-correct) statement came from Chapter 6 of Tisdall's 1905 book -- it was the author's conclusion more than a century ago.

"All this being considered, it is clear that, although Muhammad borrowed religious practices, beliefs, and legends from various different sources, yet he combined them in some measure into one more or less consistent whole, thus producing the religion of Islam. Some parts of this are good, and Islam contains certain great truths, borrowed from other systems of religion, which in a measure account for its continued existence in the world. But it certainly does not contain a single new or lofty religious conception, and its general tone is all too faithful a reflexion [sic] of the carnal and sensual nature of its founder. To use an Oriental simile is not perhaps inappropriate in speaking of such a thoroughly local and Oriental religion as Muhammadanism. Islam therefore may aptly be compared with:
"That bituminous lake where Sodom flamed,"
which, receiving into its bosom the waters of many streams that, thus united, assume the shape and form of its basin, turns them all into one great widespread Sea of Death, from whose shores flee pestilential exhalations destructive to all life within reach of their malign influence. Such is Islam. Originating from many different sources and receiving into it certain elements of truth, it has assumed its form from the character and disposition of Muhammad; and thus the good in it serves only to recommend and preserve the evil which renders it a false and delusive faith, a curse to men and not a blessing — one that has turned into deserts many of the fairest regions of the earth, that has, even in our own days, deluged many a land with innocent blood, and has smitten with a moral, intellectual, and spiritual blight every nation of men which lies under its iron yoke and groans beneath its pitiless sway."

This website and many other websites like it exist in direct response to the pervasive, lethal blight that was described by scholar Tisdall more than a century ago.

Islam is not the only pervasive, lethal blight that exists in the world today; but it is unique because its protected, fairly-benign, religious aspect is inextricably bound to its extremely-dangerous, insidious, political aspect. It is that inextricable binding which makes Islam insidious."

"When objectively considering the origin of today’s Qur’an, two questions can be asked:
1) What was the true source of the ideas that are found in today’s Qur’an?
2) Is the text of today’s Qur’an the same as the original text of 1400 years ago?

Regarding the first question about today‘s Qur‘an:
In my previous comment of 30 January 2013, I asserted -- using scholarly evidence -- that some ideas within Islam’s Qur’an were derived from various sources that became available to Muhammad during his lifetime, and all other ideas were produced by Muhammad himself to justify his personal activities, including jihad. Objective, scholarly, textual evidence reveals that the Qur’an was not divinely sent down to Muhammad.

Regarding the second question about today‘s Qur‘an:
I read a book by John Gilchrist that can be downloaded or read online at http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Jam/index.html ...
“Jam' Al-Qur'an - The Codification of the Qur'an Text
A Comprehensive Study of the Original Collection of the Qur'an Text and the Early Surviving Qur'an Manuscripts“, MERCSA, 1989, Publisher: MERCSA, P.O. Box 342, Mondeor, 2110, Republic of South Africa, Reprinted in England by T.M.F.M.T. P.O. Box 986 Rowley Regis, Warley West Midlands B65 DU, UK

In Chapter 6 is one of many conclusions from the book’s author...

“The Qur'an text as it is read and printed throughout the Muslim world today is only Zaid's version of it, duly corrected where necessary, later amended by al-Hajjaj, and read according to one of seven approved different readings. This is the reality - a far cry from the popular sentiment which argues for a single text right from the time of Muhammad himself. The reality, however, based on all the evidences available, shows that the single text as it stands today was only arrived at through an extended process of amendments, recensions, eliminations and an imposed standardisation of a preferred text at the initiative of a subsequent caliph and not by prophetic direction or divine decree.”

“The Qur'an is an authentic text to the extent that it largely retains the material initially delivered by Muhammad. No evidence of any addition to the text exists and, in respect of the vast number of variant readings and missing passages that have been recorded, there does not appear to be anything actually affecting or contradicting the basic content of the book. In this respect one can freely assume a relative authenticity of the text in the sense that it adequately retains the gist and content of what was originally there. On the contrary there is no basis in history, facts or the evidences for the development of the text to support the cherished hypothesis that the Qur'an has been preserved absolutely intact to the last dot and letter.”"

"During my study of Muhammad and his Islam over the past many months, I have wondered why Muslim people rigorously refer to Muhammad as "the Prophet" and why each reference to him is rigorously accompanied by either "PBUH" or something else like "may the peace and blessings of God be upon him".

Recently, I discovered fully-documented answers for my questions in the book, "Muhammad, The Prophet of Islam" by John Gilchrist.

Chapter 5 is "The Legend: Muhammad in Popular Islam" which may be downloaded or read online at:
http://answering-islam.org/authors/gilchrist/muhammad/chapter5.html

If you wish to fully understand the true motivations for a Muslim person's deep and essential (non-optional) veneration of Muhammad, you should read all of Chapter 5. The key phrase is "intercession of Muhammad on the day of judgement". Below are a few excerpts from Chapter 5 that I chose in order to tell the essential story.

"...In time it became fashionable to define Muhammad as well with ninety-nine names, in this case the titles being known as al-asma ash-sharifa, "the noble names", which parallel the names of Allah. After reciting each name a faithful Muslim must recite the tasliya, "may the peace and blessings of God be upon him" (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam). These names are regarded with awe and reverence and are recited with keen religious esteem..."

"...Not only is the name of Muhammad revered throughout the Muslim world but his very personality is regarded as a perfect archetype of human conduct and behaviour. For centuries faithful Muslims have sought to emulate the sunnah of the Prophet, namely his way of life and example..."

"...Yet to myriads of Muslims there is something far more important than emulating his behaviour as a means of gaining favour with Allah and that is the hope of the Prophet's intercession on the Day of Judgment when the sins and secrets in the hearts of all men will be revealed and judged accordingly..."

"...To ensure Muhammad's intercession it is essential that a faithful Muslim implore the blessings of Allah upon the Prophet. The Qur'an states that Allah and his angels send their blessings on him and Muslims will actually never mention his name without some salutation of peace and will, through many prescribed prayers, invoke their own request for the favour of Allah upon him. "Bless our master Muhammad and grant him mediation and merit and high rank and that praiseworthy station which you have promised him" is a typical prayer of this kind..."

"...In all this Muhammad becomes absolutely central to the hopes, desires, convictions and yearnings of the average Muslim. Over the many centuries of Islam his image has taken on messianic proportions and, while all Muslims will boldly state that they worship Allah alone and that their prophet was only a faithful messenger, it is obvious that his status in the world of Islam is such as to place him almost as an essential mediator between Allah and his people...""

"Dr. Warner does a good job of warning about the dangers of the fanatics who commit their atrocities in the name of Islam, the mistake he makes is teaching that what they are doing is justified by the Quran, Hadith and Sira literature.

I downloaded Dr. Warner's sample of his Quran translation and anyone can confirm this for themselves by going to http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=3&verse=20 for an essentially literal translation into English. They do a generally good job although as you will see, they get some words and tenses wrong. But if you look at the Syntax and morphology column the description of the tense is often correct even though the actual translation isn't.

The first verse in the sample is 3:20 and his translation is as follows:

3:20 If they argue with you, then say: I have surrendered myself entirely to Allah, as have my followers. Say to the People of the Book and to the ignorant: “Do you surrender to Allah?” If they become Muslims, then they will be guided to the right path, but if they reject it, then your job is only to warn them. Allah watches over all His servants.

And here is a literal translation:

Then if they argue with you, then say, "I have submitted myself to Allah and those who follow me." And say to those who were given the Book, and the ummiyeen, "Have you submitted yourselves?" Then if they submitted then surely they are guided. But if they turn back then only on you is to convey. And Allah is All-Seer of His slaves.

It doesn't say People of the Book, that is an extrapolation or interpretation.

What is translated as ignorant can be translated as illiterate but ummiyeen can also mean the people of Umm and in this case the name for Mecca in the Quran is always Umm al-Qura. So ummiyeen can either mean illiterate or people of Mecca and people of Mecca is certainly completely consistent with this context.

It doesn't say if they become Muslims (future tense), although Muslims are those who submit. To say "Muslim" is once again an extrapolation. It says if they submitted (past tense), then they are guided (past tense) not will be guided (future tense). Do tenses matter? Absolutely, the difference here is that the reason they submitted to God is that they were guided whereas in Dr. Warner's translation it says that if they become Muslim, then they will be guided. Which is a strange thing to say. Strange why? Because this is the twisted mentality and ideology of the Wahhabi/Salafi extremists who twist and misrepresent the Quran to justify their atrocities. To say become Muslim and then be guided is their message, why is Dr. Warner legitimizing it by presenting this mistranslated Quran? And it doesn't say straight path. This is completely added. And please confirm this yourself and ask why are words completely added in a translation meant to give the truth of Islam to save the Western world?

It doesn't say warn, it says convey. Simply more proof of the lack of literal translation in Dr. Warner's offering.

It doesn't say watches, it says that God is the All-Seer. Slave is literal but servant is often used.

And so in just the first verse of Dr. Warner's sample it contains all of these errors: added words, mistranslated words, incorrect tenses. And the result is to change the message.

So what would be the point of anyone reading Dr. Warner's Quran translation if their goal is to understand what the Quran really says? Granted, English translations of the Quran are very poor in general, and you can add Dr. Warner's Quran to the list of poor translations that can only mislead."