Perhaps the number one reason there is conflicting ideas regarding Islam is due to this law in Islam. Its called the Law of Abrogation. This video will explain this theological Islamic practice and how it only fuels the conflicting topic.
Modern Diplomacy, by David Bukay, Feb. 27, 2016:
Jamal Badawi, concludes his propagating claims in his e-mail to Robert Spencer, on February 14 2005, by declaring: “Those who erroneously claimed that all such definitive verses have all been ‘abrogated’ by what they called ‘the verse of the sword’ were mistaken and failed to give any definitive evidence of their claims.
There is no single verse in the Qur’an properly interpreted in its context and historical circumstances that ever allowed the Muslim to fight non-Muslims simply because they are non-Muslims…”
Well, even if Badawi ignores the 109 verses that call for violence of Jihad and slaughtering against the infidels and hundreds of verses that call for incitement and hatred against the other, he still deceives and misleads in his propagation. Contrary to his words, the mild verses that call for avoidance and against retaliation are all from the Meccan period and were all abrogated, nullified and rendered void when Muhammad became strong and victorious at Medina. Western politicians, members of the academia and the media are not only unaware and perhaps ignorant of this reality, just because they don’t learn, but at the same time disseminate, intentionally or unintentionally, the tidings of the Islamic propaganda.
When one opens the Qur’an, he sees at the top of the page in brackets the words Makki or Madani, meaning Sûrah from Meccan period or Medinan period. This differentiation is according to Islamic exegesis, since the Qur’an is organized neither chronologically nor topically but in order of the length of the Sûwar: from longest to shortest. The line of differentiation was in September 622, when Muhammad ran away from Mecca and went to Yathrib (later called Medina, or Madinat al-Nabī). This event was so significant in Muslim history that it is called Hijrah, meaning emigration, but also ‘separation,’ ‘breaking of relations.’
Most importantly, it marks the beginning of the Muslim Calendar. This is something to bear in mind concerning Islamic doctrine and teaching. Muhammad began his prophecy from year 610 in Mecca. The total majority, 90 Sûwar of the Qur’an, out of 114, are from Meccan period. Yet, Islamic exegetes preferred the Hijrah as the founding event of Islamic history. The reason is clear: at Mecca, after 12 years of preaching Muhammad had a total 80 believers and the Muslims were weak and persecuted. Only at Medina, Muhammad became the leader of a religion, a military hero who fought his enemies at the battleground and won over. The Medinan Sûwar, only 24 in number, reflect this reality, being much more belligerent and warmongering, and the Calendar emphasizes this reality: they are more important.
However, from Islamic perspective, it was essential to find out the exact chronology and the historical settings of the Qur’an Sûwar, as the order of their revelation is not known from reading the Qur’an. This problem was recognized by early Muslim scholars who devoted much attention to it. They have investigated this realm and developed it almost as a science called Asbāb al-Nuzûl, “the causes of descend,” the circumstances and reasons of revelation of the Qur’an’s Sûwar.
For the Muslims the Qur’an is miraculous (I’jāz) and has been revealed for all times and situations from the beginning of history to the end of the world. However, the many repetitions in the Qur’an, the arbitrary order, the mixture of styles and genres are indicative of human process in its creation. The Qur’an being collated piecemeal, still exacerbates the determination of the chronology of the verses and their orderly appearance. From here the principle of abrogation (al-Nāsikh wal-Mansûkh) has developed. The Arabic words ‘Nāsikh’ and ‘Mansûkh’ are derived from ‘n.s.kh.’, means ‘to abolish, to replace, to withdraw, to abrogate’. It appears four times in the Qur’an.
Arthur Jeffery explains: The Qur’an is unique among sacred scriptures in teaching a doctrine of abrogation according to which later pronouncements of the Prophet abrogate, i.e.: declare null and void, his earlier pronouncements. The importance of knowing which verses abrogate others has given rise to the Qur’anic science known as ‘Nāsikh wa-Mansûkh,’ i.e. the Abrogator and the Abrogated. So, rather than attempting to explain away the inconsistencies in passages giving regulations for the Muslim community, Qur’an scholars and jurists came to acknowledge the differences while arguing that the latest verse on any controversial subject abrogates all earlier verses that contradicted it.
According to a Hadīth: the Messenger of Allah abrogated some of his commands by others, just as the Qur’an abrogates some part of it with the other. Muhammad was accustomed to stating something to his followers with the claim that it was revealed to him from Allah, then later on he would change it and tells them that Allah had invalidated it. The Qur’an is confusing and there are revelations which might have been forgotten, changed or eliminated. There is no agreement even to which was the first Sûrah to be revealed to Muhammad (Sûrat al-A’laq, 96 or Sûrat al-Muddaththir, 74). One example of the jumbled chronology is that Sûwar 2:193 and 2:216, 2:217 were revealed just after Muhammad arrived in Medina, about six years before Sûwar 2:190–2:192 were revealed. Yet Sûrah 2:193 was inserted to follow 2:190-192.
What are the Qur’anic sources of abrogation?
When we cancel a message, or throw it into oblivion, we replace it with one better or one similar. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things? (Sûrat al-Baqarah, 2:106).
When we replace a message with another, and Allah knows best what he reveals, they say: you have made it up. Yet, most of them do not know (Sûrat al-Nahl, 16:101).
Allah abrogates or confirms whatsoever he will, for he has with him the Book of the Books (Sûrat al-Ra’d, 13:39).
If we pleased we could take away what we have revealed to you. Then you will not find anyone to plead for it with us (Sûrat Bani Isrā’īl, 17:86).
There is also references in the Hadīth:
“The Prophet said, ‘If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath'” (Sahīh Bukhāri, 7:427).
“The Prophet said, ‘It is a bad thing that some of you say, ‘I have forgotten such-and-such verse of the Qur’an.’ For indeed, I have been caused to forget it. So you must keep on reciting the Qur’an because it escapes from the hearts of men faster than a runaway camel'” (Sahīh Bukhāri, 6:550).
The assertion of the scholar Ali Dashti is explains the problems:
“It must always be borne in mind that most of the Qur’anic laws and ordinances were formulated in response to random incidents and petitions from aggrieved persons. There are inconsistencies in them and in the reasons that there are abrogating and abrogated ordinances….
Muslim exegetes agreed that Muhammad was prepared to change his mind, vows, and rules according to the circumstances. Ahmad von Denffer, a German converted to Islam exegete, summarizes the issue that the knowledge of al-‘Nāsikh wal-Mansûkh bears important perspectives: It is concerned with the correct and exact application of the laws of Allah; it is one of the important pre-conditions for interpretation (Tafsīr) of the Qur’an and the application of the Islamic law (Sharī’ah); it sheds light on the historical development of the Islamic legal code; and it helps to understand the immediate meaning of the verses concerned.
According to the narration of Ibn `Abbas, one of the most acclaimed transmitter of the Qur’an and the Hadīth:
“Sometimes the revelation used to descend on the Prophet during the night and then he forgot it during daytime, thus Allah sent down this verse’ [2:106]. Such behavior led the infidels to say that Muhammad was preaching contradictory and opposite commands. He does not receive inspiration from Allah, for he changes his mind whenever he wishes. Thus, this verse was written… Muhammad used to order something and then change it the next day whenever he found it too difficult to be implemented. Lastly, Muhammad did not want to embarrass the men around him who memorized his sayings.”
UTT, by John Guandolo, Jan. 15, 2015:
One of the facets of sharia (Islamic Law) that turns the light bulb on in people’s minds more than anything else seems to be the moment they grasp the Koranic concept of abrogation and progressive revelation.
Islam teaches that Allah (the god of Islam) revealed Islam to mankind throughout history progressively. Allah revealed the Law to Moses which predicted the coming of Mohammad. Those who did not accept the Law of Moses were lost. When Allah revealed the Evangel to Jesus, which also foretold of the coming of Mohammad, it abrogated the Law of Moses, and those who did not accept it were lost (hellbound). When the final seal of the prophets – Mohammad – came and revealed the Koran to all of mankind, it abrogated all that came before it, and those who did not accept it were lost.
According to Islam, the original Law of Moses and revelations given to Jesus were corrupted by the Jews and Christian Priests and, therefore, do not exist on the planet today in their “original” form. In other words, Islam teaches that all Bibles in the world today are corrupt because the fore-tellings of Mohammad were all intentionally removed.
According to Islam, the message of the Koran was revealed to Mohammad via an angel over a period of approximately 23 years – progressively over time.
The Koran is organized into 114 chapters called “Suras.” These suras are not organize chronologically, but generally by size of the chapter from largest to smallest with the exception of Sura 1 which is only several lines long.
Three times in the Koran (2:106, 16:101, 17:106) Allah says that whatever he reveals chronologically later abrogates (overrules or cancels) what he previously revealed. Allah commands Mohammad to bring the community of people from their unbelief to full compliance with sharia progressively in stages. This is exactly what we are seeing on the ground today across the world. The Muslim community is slowly moving from living however they want to live to living in communities that are adhering to the sharia to a greater and greater degree.
According to Islam, Mohammad first received revelations in Mecca for a period of thirteen (13) years. He was completely rejected as a “prophet” by the religious scholars (Jewish, Christian) of the time. During those years only approximately 200 people converted to Islam – in 13 years. This is the time of “tolerance” where Mohammad had to tolerate the non-Muslims and there were no revelations of jihad.
Then Mohammad made the hijra to Medina, and was called to become a political and military leader. There he raised an army and gained many converts to Islam as he began to get revelations of jihad. First Mohammad received revelations of defensive jihad, then limited offensive jihad, and finally, the command to wage jihad as a permanent obligation until the entire world is under sharia.
Allah said it last (chronologically) in the Koran, then Mohammad said it, and then Mohammad did it. This is why there is no gray area in sharia as to the permanent command for all Muslims to wage jihad until the entire world is under sharia when they have the strength and ability to do so.
The Law of Jihad provides for how jihad can be waged by Muslims depending on where they are and their abilities.
Bringing greater sharia adherence to the world via jihad is the Muslim Brotherhood’s entire focus of all they do, and the stated objective of all of the jihadi organizations on the planet.
Therefore, it is logical, when seen from the perspective of Islam, that if the Koran abrogated all that came before it Allah would say “Whoever accepts a religion other than Islam will never have it accepted of him and he will be of those who truly fail in the hereafter (go to hell).” (Koran 3:85)
This logically leads to the requirement of the Koran for Muslims to never take Jews and Christians as friends (Koran 5:51), for pagans to be given the option to convert or be killed (Koran 9:5), and for the “People of the Book” (Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians) to be given the option – if they choose not to convert to Islam and do not want to be killed – to submit to Islam under sharia, pay the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya), and “feel themselves subdued.” (Koran 9:29)
Islamic scholars have come to an agreement on the chronological order of the suras. While there are slight differences in some of the listings, Sura 5 is always the last sura (chronologically) to discuss relations between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Sura 9 is the last to discuss jihad. These are the last words from Allah on these issues, and Islam teaches they abrogate all that came before them.
Individuals who convert into Islam are also taught Islam progressively and not all at once. The Muslim Brotherhood’s “How To” manual entitled Methodology of Dawah Ilallah in American Perspective has this to say about converting a non-Muslim to Islam:
“Some rituals of religion and traditions of the Muslim Community are explained. A short account of the Prophet’s (PBUH) life is presented, without the revolutionary aspect. When Islam is acceptable to the new entrants in this concocted or abbreviated form, the ceremony of Shahadah is performed with great reverence. A non-Muslim thus becomes a Muslim, obedient to Allah (SWT) alone. The revolutionary aspect of Islam is rarely brought before the new converts, as in most cases the Da’ee (the one bringing the non-Muslim to Islam) himself is not conversant with it.”
When individuals or communities come to Islam, it is done progressively and in stages. Unlike when people join into other groups, Muslim do not tell new converts the whole story. They bring it to them over time. Mohammad had 23 years to bring people from where they were to full obedience to Allah.
Looking at today’s world events through this lense, we can see the move in the Ummah (global Muslim community) towards greater sharia adherence. We see it in their dress, how they behave, how they pray, and in many other ways. We also know that the more we visually see sharia adherence, the more violence is being taught within the Muslim community.
This progression over time from little sharia adherence to full sharia adherence is the mirror of Mohammad receiving the revelations of the Koran progressively and moving the Muslim community towards complete obedience to Allah and his law – sharia.
The focus is on the Muslim community first, as we see the military jihadi organizations like ISIS and Al Qaeda doing today. They are forcing Islamic nations to adhere to sharia.
Soon we will see, and are seeing, the HIJRA into non-Muslim lands – also known as the “refugee” surge into Europe and the United States. Finally, we will see the call for all non-Muslims to convert to Islam, submit to Islam or be killed. While some of this is beginning to happen, when the Global Islamic Movement assesses Muslim lands are sharia compliant, they will focus their attention on the West.
All of this is the mirror image of the progressive revelation of Islam as revealed to the world over history, and specifically to Mohammad during the 23 years he received the Koran from Allah.
We are all watching it practically play out today in real time, and this is something the suit-wearing jihadis in America are not telling our leaders.
Political Islam, by Bill Warner, Oct. 13, 2015:
The liberal media is beginning to admit that Islam has a formal doctrine of jihad. They have been forced into this admission due to the constant propaganda of jihad doctrine by ISIS. Now the media says that Islamic State, ISIS, has a narrow interpretation of Islam. But, it is just opposite, ISIS has the broadest interpretation of Islam.
Islamic doctrine is slowly revealed, just like the Koran. It has an early form in Mecca and a fully developed later form in Medina. Now these may contradict each other, but both are true. The law of abrogation says that the later doctrine is better or stronger than the earlier doctrine.
ISIS uses all of the doctrine, including Medina. The so-called peaceful Muslims do not use all of the doctrine, just the early Meccan form. So the peaceful Muslims have the narrow, exclusive interpretation. ISIS and all of the jihadis have the broadest interpretation, which is inclusive.
Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey, Feb. 11, 2015:
The Center for Security Policy hosted a Defeat Jihad Summit in Washington D.C. today. Among the speakers were Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, Representatives Steven King and Mike Pompeo, Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, Danish free speech advocate Lars Hedegaard, and Major (ret.) Stephen Coughlin.
The video below shows Maj. Coughlin’s brief but comprehensive explanation of the Doctrine of Abrogation as practiced in Islamic law. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for excerpting this clip:
Watch the full six-hour video here.
The more lengthy explanation of abrogation below is adapted from previous briefings by Maj. Coughlin. As always, his material is scrupulously sourced.
The Doctrine of Abrogation
At the very pinnacle of Islamic law is the Koran, which is the uncreated word of God as revealed through his prophet. Every word in the Koran comes from God himself, and is inerrant. Yet the Koran sometimes contradicts itself. These seemingly intractable differences are reconciled through the doctrine of “abrogation”.
So what is abrogation?
This is what Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee has to say about abrogation in Islamic Jurisprudence:
The law was laid down in the period of the Prophet (peace be unto him) gradually and in stages. The aim was to bring a society steeped in immorality to observe the highest standards of morality. This could not be done abruptly. It was done in stages, and doing so necessitated repeal and abrogation of certain laws.
As you can see, Nyazee acknowledges that the Koran contradicts itself. Upon discovering this fact, someone who knows very little about Islam might say, “The Koran contradicts itself. Doesn’t this mean it’s broken?” But it is well understood in Islam that the Koran contradicts itself. This fact is explained, and taken into account. There are methods for dealing with it.
This becomes significant when non-Muslims approach a Muslim cultural expert or “moderate” to ask about certain verses of the Koran that are cited by radicals to justify their violent jihad. The cultural expert or “moderate” will respond with something like this: “You (infidel) must read from the entire body of the Koran to understand the true meaning. Those radicals cherry-pick from the back of the Koran.”
With this reply the cultural expert gives the impression that he does not agree with the radicals, but he never actually says that what they cherry-pick is wrong.
So what is the Koranic basis for the doctrine of abrogation?
It is a Qur’an which We have divided into parts from time to time, in order that thou mightest recite it to men at intervals: We have Revealed it by stages. (Qur’an 17:106)
Concerning this verse, the Qur’an commentator Yusuf Ali says:
The marvel is that these parts, revealed at different times and in different circumstances, should fit together so closely and consistently as they do. All revelation is progressive. The previous revelations were also progressive. Each of them marked a stage in the world’s spiritual history. Man’s mind does not take in more than his spiritual state will have prepared him for. Allah’s revelation comes as a light to illuminate our difficulties and show us the way in actual situations that arise.
Here’s another verse covering the same subject:
When We substitute one revelation for another – and Allah knows best what He reveals in stages — They say, “Thou art but a forger”: But most of them understand not. (Qur’an 16:101)
And once again, a comment by Yusuf Ali:
The doctrine of progressive revelation from age to age and time to time does not mean that Allah’s fundamental Law changes. It is not fair to charge a Prophet of Allah with forgery because the Message, as revealed to him, is in a different form from that revealed before, when the core of the Truth is the same, for it comes from Allah.
The final Koranic verse on progressive revelation:
None of Our revelations do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but we substitute something better or similar; knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things? (Qur’an 2:106)
Thus we have three different citations from the Koran in which Allah says he reveals things in stages, and that with each stage he abrogates the previous stages. We would expect — because it is the uncreated word of Allah — that what was said later would overrule what was said earlier. And any Islamic law which did not reflect this fact would be suspect.
That means that if the radicals are cherry-picking chronologically from the back of the Koran,they are correct.
Anyone who looks at the entire body of the Koran to get its true meaning is actually not oriented on the legal parts, because it is weighted, just as our legal system is weighted to recognize the most recent precedent.
Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee has this to say on the principle of naskh:
The literal meaning of naskh is canceling or transferring. In its technical sense it is used to mean the “lifting (raf’) of a legal rule through a legal evidence of a later date.” The abrogating text or evidence is called nasikh, while the repealed rule is called themansukh.
In Outlines of Muhammadan Law, Asaf A.A. Fyzee remarks:
The Koran according to this theory is the first source of law. … It is for this reason that the verse of the Koran (ayat), although only a few of them deal specifically with legal questions, are held to be of paramount authority. In interpreting the Koranic verses, one important principle has to be observed. Some verses are deemed to be the abrogating (nasikh) verses and some to be the abrogated (mansukh) ones. Generally speaking the earlier verses are deemed to be repealed by the later ones.
Thus, because the later Koranic verses are always considered to be the valid and binding points of Islamic law, it becomes important to arrange the Koran chronologically. When the Koran is arranged that way, it is divided into the early, middle, and late Meccan periods, and the Medina period. Surah 2 is generally understood to be the first surah of the Medina period. Surah 9 is the penultimate surah of the Koran, and 5 is the last surah of the Koran. However, there is some disagreement among scholars about the ordering, and different orderings exist. Some authorities name 110 as the final surah, rather than 5, and some say 9 is the last.
What is important in this context is the general agreement that Surah 9 is the last to talk about jihad, 5 is the last to talk about relations with non-Muslims, and 3 is understood to come after 2. All four schools of Sunni Islamic are in general agreement on abrogating/abrogated texts, and on the major issues they are in general agreement. 75% of Sunni Islamic law is recognized in common across all four schools.
So a Muslim jurist does not read Islamic law and decide what is or is not abrogated. These issues have already been decided. If you are a Hanbali, or Hanafi, or Shafite, or Maliki Islamic scholar, you will refer to your school’s books on abrogated texts. No one can become a judge unless he knows them by heart.
How are the surahs in the Koran arranged? When you open the Koran, you see Surah 1, which is very brief, and serves as an introduction. Next comes Surah 2, which is the largest surah in the Koran, about 150 pages long. Surah 3 is the second largest, Surah 4 is the third largest, and so on. It becomes obvious that when the scholars constructed the Koran, they put the introductory surah first, but after that the Koran was ordered by the size of the surahs, from the largest to the smallest chapter. It is not arranged chronologically.
When you look at the entire body of the Koran, the Meccan period seems much bigger than the Medinan period. But surahs 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9 — all from the Medinan period — comprise about 80% of the Koran, while surahs 109, 112, 113, and 114 — from the Meccan period — occupy less than entire pages. In other words, the number of a surah does not refer to its order in the chronology, but to its size.
Islamic law is entirely derived from the Medinan period. Anything said during the Medinan period overrules anything on the same subject that was said in the Meccan periods. And anything said in the later part of the Medinan period overrules anything said in the earlier part.
Whenever a “moderate” finally concedes that there is such a thing as jihad, he will quote Surah 2 (with some support from Surah 8), because the first jihad was mentioned in Surah 2, and can reasonably be expected to be defensive jihad. But remember: the last surah that talks about jihad is Surah 9.
So how does this affect our understanding of Islam?
Surah 2 says:
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold. (Qur’an 2:256)
Virtually any Westerner who knows anything about Islam has heard this. But what most people have not heard is this:
Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam will never have it accepted of him, and he will be of those who have truly failed in the hereafter (Qur’an 3:85)
Oh ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors; they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them for friendship is of them. Verily Allah guideth not the unjust. (Qur’an 5:51)
So who are the unjust, besides the Christians and Jews? The Muslims who take Christians and Jews as friends.
As you can see from the chart, Surah 2 is abrogated by Surah 3, which is abrogated by Surah 5. This means that 5:51 is the final word on how a pious Muslim must regard Christians and Jews.
|1.||Imran Asham Khan Nyazee, Islamic Jurisprudence, (Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press, 2003), 319.|
|2.||Yusuf Ali, Qur’an, Comment 2317.|
|3.||Yusuf Ali, Qur’an, Comment 2140.|
|4.||Nyazee, Jurisprudence, 318.|
|5.||Asaf A. A. Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law, 4th ed. (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1974), at 19-20.|
|6.||Keller, Reliance of the Traveller, vii.|
American Thinker, By Richard Butrick, August 31, 2014:
One face is for Islam’s useful idiots the other is for Islam’s faithful.
The Koran is not arranged in chronological order. When it is arranged in chronological order it is clear that the Koran undergoes a serious transition after Muhammad’s first real triumph on the battlefield at Badr in 624. The period following that battle is called the Medina period of the prophet’s life. Conceptually this transition can be seen as a transition from the Old Koran to the New Koran. Unlike the transition from the Old to the New Testament, the transition from the “Old” Koran (pre-Medina) to the “New” Koran (Medina) is a transition to a more vengeful, demanding, supremacist God.
He who at Mecca is the admonisher and persuader, at Medina is the legislator and the warrior, who dictates obedience, and uses other weapons than the pen of the Poet and the Scribe. [link]
In practice, Quranic abrogation results in a known doctrinal footprint that subordinates the milder, more moderate verses of the Quran from the Meccan period of revelation, to the later and violent verses of the Medina period. Islamic law is substantially derived from the Medinan period. Where a conflict exists, anything said during the Medinan period overrules anything on the same subject in the Meccan. And anything said in the later part of the Medinan period either overrules or controls anything said in the earlier part. [link]
In an attempt to polish Islam’s image, Muslim activists usually quote verses from the Quran that were written in the early days of the Islamic movement while Mohammed lived in Mecca. Those passages make Islam appear loving and harmless because they call for love, peace and patience. Such is a deception. The activists fail to tell gullible people that such verses, though still in the Quran, were nullified, abrogated, rendered void by later passages that incite killing, decapitations, maiming, terrorism and religious intolerance. The latter verses were penned while Mohammed’s headquarters was based in Medina. [The Quran’s Doctrine of Abrogation — Abdullah Al Araby]
A clear-cut example of this principle of abrogation is the oft quoted passage from the Old Koran, “Let there be no compulsion in religion.” (Q 5:99) which is abrogated by chronologically later passages such as these:
Quran (3:56) – “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”
Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”
Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Quran (17:16) – “And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction.”
And on it goes. Apologists for Islam insist these passages refer to retaliatory measures to be taken when attacked.
Regarding these passages, it is to be noted that the Koran is the word of God and not a testament as are the Old and New Testaments and is thereby much less subject to “interpretation.” Moreover, it is axiomatic in Islam that Muhammad is the perfect male to be emulated as much as possible by all male Muslims. The post-Meccan Muhammad is a warrior, raider, conqueror, and subjugator of the non-Islamic world. The mission of all good Muslims is, correspondingly, the spread of Islam any means possible.
The great divide between the Old Koran, which is relatively tolerant and accepting of Jews and Christians, and the New Koran which views Jews and Christians as vermin worthy only extermination or servile groveling before their Muslim masters, enables the supremacist mandate in Islam to present one face to the West’s useful idiots and another to the faithful.
It has worked.
The Old Koran is used to piously claim that terrorism, suicide bombing, and persecution of religious minorities and disempowerment of women are “un-Islamic.”
What is the useful-idiot version of Islam? Here it is a culled version based on quotes from President Bush’s comments on Islam:
Islam is a faith that brings comfort to people. It inspires them to lead lives based on honesty, and justice, and compassion. It’s a faith that has made brothers and sisters of every race. It’s a faith based upon love, not hate. Mohammad’s word has guided billions of believers across the centuries, and those believers built a culture of learning and literature and science. All the world continues to benefit from this faith and its achievements.
And here is President Obama solemnly declaring that Islam is based on the principles “of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
But here are the real five pillars of Islam for the faithful:
I. Islam is to dominate over all other religions Q9:33, 61:9, 8:39
2. Muslims are to purify all of Arabia of its Pagans who can convert or be killed Q9:5 3. 3. Muslims are to fight and subjugate other non-Muslims and subdue and make them inferior second-class citizens (Dhimmis) to pay jizya (humiliation tax) to save their lives. Q9:29
4. Muslims are to have hatred and enmity forever for non-Muslims until they worship Allah alone Q60:4, they should fight those unbelievers close to them and let them find harshness in the Muslims Q9:123
5. Muslims must engage in this jihad (struggle) as this fighting is ordained for them even if they dislike it 2:216 and they are told they can overcome much greater enemies to a multiple of 10 times or more Q8:65
From George W. Bush to Hillary Clinton the “hijacked Islam” or “un-Islamic” meme has infected U.S. foreign policy and enabled creeping Sharia at home. It seems to have gotten to the point that exonerating Islam is the primary concern of U.S. foreign and defense policy with regard to terrorist activity from ISIS to Fort Hood to Boko Haram. The first order of business is to insure that “us folks” understand that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. Just after the terrible treatment of Yazidis and the beheading of Foley, practically the first words out of President Obama’s mouth were that “ISIL speaks for no religion.”
The Obama crew has been suckered, bamboozled, and taqiyyaed into believing the Islam of the Old Koran is the real Islam. But as the menacing face of the Islam of the New Koran turns fully into view it is becoming increasingly clear that it is the Obama team of useful idiots who have been hijacked. Even CNN has published a report showing that al Qaeda affiliated groups are gaining strength:
That was in April, before ISIL showed its real power. And wait till we pull out of Afghanistan. It will be brutally clear that it is not ISIL but Obama and his crew of Islam’s useful idiots that “speak for no religion.”
- List of Abrogations in the Qur’an (wikiislam.net)
Published on Friday, 23 May 2014 at Liberty GB
Written by IQ al Rassooli:
Before we address this subject, it is imperative to point out to readers one of the most important pieces of information that not a single scholar of Islam brings to the fore. This is the fact that all that humanity knows about Muhammad’s Quran and the miracles that allegedly happened to him are the assertions by Muhammad and only Muhammad that he had encountered them.
There are no other eyewitnesses to all of these events. None of Muhammad’s wives or intimate companions ever heard Muhammad talk to the Angel Gabriel. There is not a single witness to 23 years of alleged revelations to Muhammad.
In a nutshell all that humanity knows about Muhammad are Muhammad’s unsubstantiated, unwitnessed and uncorroborated words that leave a huge question mark regarding their veracity.
Abrogation means to overrule, to make null and void or to overturn earlier revelations and or commandments by the later ones.
The Quran is unique among all the holy scriptures of other peoples since it is the only one that allows the God of Muhammad, Allah, to keep changing his mind regarding his alleged revelations to Muhammad. This means that Allah revealed something to Muhammad at an earlier time but later on changed the revelation.
Any intelligent human being would ask the following logical question: How is it conceivable for any God, any omniscient God, not to know beforehand everything?
As shocking a realisation as this is, the fact remains, none the less, that Muhammad’s Quran contains abrogated and abrogating verses in 71 suras (chapters) out of 114 – comprising 62% of all the suras of the Quran that have had verses changed, overruled or deleted.
This shows Muhammad’s Allah as a God bereft of foresight, with a fickle mind and incapable of assessing the weaknesses and strengths of Muhammad or his followers; this is of course a blasphemous characterisation of any omniscient divinity.
Neither in the Hebrew Bible nor in the New Testament are there such verses. The God of Israel is not shown to give one command one instance and then change it either immediately, shortly afterwards or much later because He did not realise that it was too onerous to be fulfilled by mere humans.
The verse that allows Allah to abrogate was revealed in
Al Baqara 2:106 “None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We substitute something better or similar; knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?”
Why would any omniscient God not know beforehand the weaknesses or strengths of His creation? Surely it is blasphemy to impugn to the Almighty human weaknesses and vulnerabilities?
Why would any almighty God change His mind and replace earlier ordinances with others?
Why would such a God especially replace earlier ones with similar ones? Why similar? Why not reveal the better ones from the very beginning?
The reader is entitled to ask such questions that require intelligent and logical answers. Can any Muhammadan Muslim provide any logical answers?
Al Nisa 4:82 “Do they not ponder over the Qur’an? Had it been the word of any other but Allah they would surely have found a good deal of variation in it, much discrepancy and incongruity … those who check and scrutinize will know it.”
The Quran is here challenging the reader to find variations, discrepancies and/or abnormalities in its narrative. The answers to the challenge are actually – and incredibly – provided by the Quran and Hadiths themselves. An enormous deal of variation is exactly what is found in the Quranic verses.
There is also of course the issue of the Satanic Verses which were repeated by Muhamnmad who did not recognise them as coming from Satan.
It is as if by divine justice that the Quranic challenge has been met and our case against the veracity and alleged divine origin of the Quran is rested.
Al Ra’d 13:38 “It was not for any Apostle to come up with a miracle or sign unless it was granted by Our permission. For every age there is a Book revealed. Ar-Rahman abrogates, blots out, or confirms [whatever He wants].”
Al Nahl 16:101 “And when We exchange a verse in place of another verse and Allah knows very well what He is sending down they say, ‘Thou art a mere forger!’ Nay, but the most of them have no knowledge.”
The reader should be aware of the very unusual transition in the verse above from “We exchange … another verse” to “and Allah knows … down”. Why and how could Allah speak in the first person [We] at the beginning of the verse and then move immediately and without any logical or grammatical reason to the impersonal [and Allah] in the second part of the same verse? It is precisely because Allah “knows very well what He is sending down” that he has absolutely no reason to change his mind and abrogate or make forgotten an earlier ‘revelation’.
Even the illiterate and unlearned Arabs of Mecca found it intellectually and theologically fraudulent to believe in such a fickle, indecisive and fallible Allah.
Let me now give you one glaring example of what and how abrogation is achieved:
Al Anfal (Spoils of War) 8:65 “O apostle! Rouse the believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you patient and persevering they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred they will vanquish a thousand of the unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding.”
In this verse, Allah is putting very onerous odds for the Muhammadans to achieve in reality. No matter how brave and capable people may be, ten to one odds in a fight are almost impossible to realise.
When Muhammad’s followers heard this verse they were appalled and correctly pointed out to Muhammad how onerous and impossible such odds are. This of course necessitated the ‘revelation’ of another verse – immediately after this one – for much reduced odds of two to one instead; as in the following abrogating verse.
This sura also clearly exposes Islam to be a belief system that not only encourages violence but actually makes it a sacred duty for Muhammadans to kill anyone who does not believe in Muhammad’s version of Islam.
Not only is the “All Forgiving Allah” exhorting his followers to kill anyone who is not a Muslim, but he is also saying that all non-Muslims are so stupid that they will be unable to defend themselves and therefore deserve death.
Al Anfal 8.66 “For the present Allah hath lightened your [task] for He knoweth that there is a weak spot in you: but [even so] if there are a hundred of you patient and persevering they will vanquish two hundred and if a thousand they will vanquish two thousand with the leave of Allah: for Allah is with those who patiently persevere.”
Verses 65 and 66 represent a major trend in the Quran whereby Muhammad, finding it difficult for his followers to achieve or implement a Quranic condition, creates a follow-up verse of made-to-order ‘revelations’ reducing and/or lightening the burden upon them, hence abrogating the earlier one.
If the Quran was given by God, these verses make a mockery of His prescience. It should be obvious that the Almighty should already know what the followers of Muhammad are or are not capable of and should not need to abrogate, change, modify or lighten any of them. Each should have been a perfect fit for the occasion (see Bukhari Hadith 6:175).
The most important abrogating verse in Muhammad’s Quran is 9.05, which is called the Fighting Verse:
Al Tauba 9.05 “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”
According to Al Suyuti’s Al Itqan fi Ulum al Quran, this single verse abrogated, overruled, made null and void 124 earlier, conciliatory verses.
Since the Quran and its interpreters repeatedly mention the inviolability and eternal character of Allah’s rules and regulations, how can they at the same time explain away the most controversial cases of the abrogated and abrogating suras which number 71, that is 62% of the Quran?
In addition to the above anomaly, the reader should also be aware of the missing and forgotten verses that are mentioned in the Hadiths (traditions about Muhammad).
• Why and what for would Allah, the Omniscient, the All Knowing, change his mind at what he had already announced and ‘replace’ it with one ‘equal’ or ‘better’ than the first?
• What would the purpose be of changing one verse for an equal?
• Why change it if it is only for an equal?
• Does Allah break his own promises and instructions?
• Does Allah hence have more than one preserved tablet in Heaven?
• If so, which one of them is the correct one?
It all sounds more than just blasphemy and mumbo jumbo. It is an insult to the Almighty and to the intelligence of all human beings who accept such profanity and idiocy of a concept or dogma.
All the abnormalities, ambiguities, stupidities and contradictions in the Quran are instantly and summarily resolved when the listener/reader absorbs and accepts these simple and unchallengeable conclusions:
• There is not a single letter, let alone a word, a verse or a chapter in the Quran that could have been revealed by any omniscient divinity because in reality, every letter, word, verse and chapter in the Quran is the product of Muhammad’s imagination, his alter ego, his biography, but very cleverly projected into the unsuspecting mouths of Allah and Gabriel to give them the aura of sanctity and divinity.
• Allah, Gabriel and Muhammad are one and the same: Muhammad.
• Muhammad used Allah and Gabriel as props to give his alleged revelations a cloak of sanctity and divinity but in reality it is all otherwise totally Muhammad’s.
• The Quran was recited and authored by Muhammad over an incredibly long period of 23 years and since Allah is not God and most certainly not the God of Jesus, Moses and Abraham, then Muhammadan Islam is not a religion but a cult belief system, the Cult of Muhammad.
Those who doubt what is being revealed here can read much more on my website www.alrassooli.com and in the following written by the followers of Muhammad: Jamal al Din al Juzi in his Nawasikh al Quran; Abu Ja’afar al Nakhass, al Nasikh wal Mansukh.
Renowned scholar IQ al Rassooli is Liberty GB’s expert advisor on Islam. He is an Iraqi-born native Arabic-speaker who has dedicated much of his life to the study and critical analysis of Muhammad, the Qur’an, Hadiths, Shariah, Arabic and Islamic history.
IQ’s book trilogy entitled, Lifting the Veil: The True Faces of Muhammad and Islam, is available from Amazon. His Idiot’s Guide to Islam can be accessed via the ‘Resources’ menu at the top of this page.
Some other articles by IQ al Rassooli:
- A Shocking Interview with I. Q. Rassooli, Islam Expert by Clare Lopez
- I. Q. Rassooli’s YouTube channel – AhmadsQuran5
- Index with clickable links by subject to all I. Q. Rasooli’s Lifting the Veil talks