Along Came Muhammad

Gen. James Green

I N MY TWO FACES OF ISLAM writings, I prove that Muhammad, while living in Mecca, getting his early “revelations,” became a different Muhammad when he moved to Medina. While in Mecca, he was tolerant towards the Meccans: “Say: o ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been want to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your way, and to me mine” (Quran 109).

Lamentably, the Quran is NOT consistent in its TOLERANCE teachings. It is pointed out by the above sura that the prophet of Islam expressed openness towards the Jews, Christians, and Sabians of his day. After years in Medina, things changed: “Anyone who chooses a religion other than Islam will not be acceptable and will be one of the lost in the next world” (sura 3:85, see also Ayoub, vol. 2, p. 241). And by now (2015!) the world has a better understanding of TERROR-TERRORIST.

When one looks up the dozens and dozens of suras in the Quran, and the dozens and dozens of quotes from the Hadiths, one will see why I call my writing The Two Faces of Islam.

To Today’s Subject

IF ONE CARES to study out the words “murder” and “kill”/ “killing” etc. (from the Bible), one will see that there is NO contradiction, despite what some “try” to point out. Later, more on this subject. I want to ask: “Did Muhammad copy the Jews in their murder (ings)?” After all, the Quran has taken many, many things from our Holy Bible and put an Arabic twist to them. I personally DO NOT believe for a minute that Muhammad received any “heavenly” revelations: I believe he made up most of his stories to start a new religion (see our other writings to confirm this).

Now, to be just and equally fair here, I will present my finding on the term σικάριος from “sicarius”= “dagger-carrier,” “assassin”). Remember, the Jews were before Muslims.

George Sale (Westerner) translated the Quran into English from Arabic (1734). He wrote: “Mohammad gave his Arabs the best religion he could as well as the best laws; preferable, at least, to those of the ancient pagan lawgivers” (Sale, p. 7). Responding to Islam-bashers, Sale asserted that they deceive themselves if they imagine this religion was propagated by the “sword” alone (p. 10). Well, Mr. Sale, if you were alive today, I would send you a copy of our “Offensive War to Spread Islam” (quotes/writings taken from Islam’s very own scholars—ancient and modern). Sale was right on the first point: Islam was Muhammad’s invention, not God’s!

Muhammad tried to copy Christ while in Mecca; while in Medina he copied the Old Testament God where God ordered WAR (please note that the Bible makes a distinction between “murder” and “killing” (as do most cultures/nations of the world). But the Jews did not always obey God’s Word; Israel had its zealot movement (just as Islam has its jihadists today).

The Book of Acts (21:38) mentions an Egyptian who stirred up a rebellion and led 4,000 “cut-throats” out into the wilderness. This revolt happened in Israel under Felix. According to Josephus (Jewish War II), the number is 30,000. He mentions that “the Assassins” (the Greek is a transliteration of the Latin “sicarii”: were so called because they hid a knife [sica] in their clothes, and during festivals engaged in “patriotic” assassination) were active in the time of Felix; but Josephus does not connect them with the Egyptian. This is not any debate here. Bar Cochba was another “messianic” in those days (this account is also mentioned in Hippolytus (c. 160-235 A.D.), disciple of Irenaeus; mentioned in the writings Origen, of Alexandria, pupil of Clement of Alexandria).

The sicarii in Roman Law

FROM THE TIME of the lex Cornelia published under Sulla Sicarius as a terminus technicus (technical term) in Roman law denoting not only the “assassin” in the narrower sense, but also more generally, the violent “murder” or “inciter to murder;” the weapon proves the intent! (Only the intentional deed came under the lex Cornelia, see Mommsen, p. 626.)

The lex Cornelia, it is said, applied also against armed robbers (latrones) banded in groups. Muhammad was good at this—he not only raided Jewish (and other) caravans for plunder, but also put the sword to the neck often (see our booklets).

Among the latrones, according to the Roman view, were “guerillas” in Italy and especially the provinces who rebelled against the government without declaring war on Rome officially as “hostes” or without being considered worthy of a Roman declaration of war (see Pomponius according to Justinlanus Digesta, 50, 16, 118 (ed. T. Mommsen, 1870).

As a punishment, sicarii or latrones, especially when they were slaves, were put to death by crucifixion in the imperial period.

The sicarii in Josephus

IT IS KNOWN that Josephus adopts the standpoint of Roman law when he calls the HATRED freedom fighters of the first Jewish revolt “robbers” and “assassins” (σικάρίους). It is said that Josephus justifies the term “sicarii” by explaining that they carried daggers under their cloaks (see Bell., 2, 254; Ant. 20, 186). The weapon was a curved sword (like the Persian akinake and the Roman sica; the curved sword mentioned in 1 QM 5:11-14 was too big for assassination).

Judaism and Islam are alike in many ways (Judaism outside the law that is). The sicarri’s first victim was the then high-priest Jonathan (see Bell. 2.252, 256; according to Antiquities 20, 185 the sicarii flourished under Festus; according to Antiquities 20, 204 Albinus extirpated most of them.

Later On…

LATER WHEN the Jewish rebels split up into groups after the victory over Cestius, Josephus uses the term sicarii for the followers of Menahem who after his assassination, retreated to Masada (see Bell., 4, 399-405 etc.). He then uses it for the partisans who escaped to Egypt, 7.409-419 and finally for the rebellious Jews in Cyrene, 7, 437-446. This, it is said, also applies to the use of zealots which later Josephus mostly reserves for the priestly group which fought in the temple, Bell., 5, 5-105.

Josephus uses interchangeably “sicarii” and “bandits.”

When one studies the life of Muhammad, one will see that he was a man that robbed and murdered; NO way around this. Jesus the Christ did neither. This is true according to both the Quran and the Holy Bible.

Jesus never killed/murdered anyone; Muhammad not only murdered (in cold blood!) groups of peoples (non-Muslims), he also had anyone who criticized him put to death. Some tolerance! Muhammad ordered the death of Uqba, who had written verses against him. This is Islamic law today: murder any and all (if possible), who criticize Islam, the Quran, or the prophet. Some love! Some tolerance!

Asthma (another poet) wrote against your “highness,” biographer Ishaq wrote: “when the apostle heard what she had said, he said, ‘who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?’” (1, p. 676). It is stated that Umair heard him and murdered her that night. When told the next morning what had happened, Muhammad said to his ASSASSIN, “you have helped God and His apostle” (1, p. 676).

Unlike Jesus, Muhammad was very sensitive to literary attacks. Poor baby! They were for him, as is noted by those who knew him, an UNFORGIVABLE SIN. Jesus said that any sin against Him was forgiven, but not against the Holy Ghost (see Mat. 12:31-32). And the Islamic faith puts Muhammad above Jesus? That’s right!

He had two Meccan prisoners of war who had composed satires about him executed/murdered!! He also had some women whose songs had provoked him, murdered (1, p. 551)!

We all remember Salmon Rushdie who wrote “The Satanic Verses” (in spite of his Muslim background) used the name Mahound, the name Rushdie gives the (false) prophet Muhammad, has been used in the medieval/modern times to lambaste monsters, false gods, etc. (see Oxford Eng. Dictionary). A death sentence was placed upon Rushdie for years (probably still there!). The Muslims who take the Quran serious terrorize any and ALL if they disagree with their MURDEROUS religion. Christianity is totally different.

Zealot Party

WHAT DISTINGUISHED these “religious” Jews was not so much doctrine—they shared this with Judas, the founder of the Zealot Party (much can be found on this)—but the courageous nature of their effort, which held life cheap, whether their own, or that of others (see Ant., 20, 165. Josephus Bell., 2, 254-260 contrasts with the sicarii the FANATICS and DECEIVERS whose “hands were purer;” these popular “charismatic” leaders feared the use of violence and counted on a divine miracle which would announce symbolically the down of the age of salvation (TDNT, p. 279, vol. 7).

The Difference

THE DIFFERENCE between the “sicarii” and the “jihadist” was that the Jews did not act in blind nationalism, nor an excessive LUST for domination (as do the militant Muslims). What is true with both the sicarii and jihadist was motivated, not by unrighteousness (both believe they are RIGHT!), but by passionate ZEAL and active self-sacrifice for God’s/Allah’s honor and the Torah/Quran. The maxim that God/Allah alone is to be honored was consistently applied. Even Josephus had to admit that they (the sicarii) accepted suicide/martyrdom rather than the yoke of Roman rule (see Bell. 7, 386-401, 410, 418). They hated the idea that the emperor was to be honored as “god” (7, 418), hated the tax statues and the census (we Christians do the same!). But Jews friendly to the Romans were equally hated and counted as renegades (or Gentile). We still find this spirit in both Judaism and Islam—both consider non-Jew/non-Muslim worthy of death (naturally or otherwise).

The Sword

THE SICARII priests who engaged in politics of compromise were seducing the people into “idolatry,” and what Josephus ascribed to a propensity to cruelty (7, 256) really derived from obedience to God’s Law, which commanded that apostates, and even WHOLE districts who did so (idolatry) should be burnt with fire and killed with the sword.

Muhammad had to copy all this fire/sword also…even today as I write, BOTH ARE BEING USED freely (see our 4 hour DVD called “The ISIS Crisis”). The Bible did (not now!) command such treatment as Dt. 13:7-19 tells us (read the hadiths/Quran for details too). By purgative action of the sword/fire they sought to prepare the way for God’s (and Allah’s) coming, and prevent the land from being smitten by God’s wrath (see Mal. 3:24).

Stealing (theft) from the rich was common place with both the Jews and Muslims. It is a well known fact that Muhammad robbed and murdered (Muslims like us to believe that he was always justified, but according to who?) God did away with such things through Jesus the Christ—Muhammad carried on and on. The Muslims call their prophet “Muhammad the Conqueror.” The battle of Badr is a case and point—a rich caravan of the Quraish was on its was from Syria to Mecca, so the “prophet” took 305 (?) men out to plunder it, a battle broke out at Badr, killing about 50 Quraish, the rest were taken prisoner. The caravan leader Abu Jahl (who was hated by the “prophet”) was killed, his head cast at the prophet’s feet. Some of the prisoners were later murdered! Some, under the THREAT of DEATH were spared—they quickly became Muslims (some way to convert lost souls!!!). The rest were kept for ransom. This kind of stuff still goes on as I write.

It is reported that the battle of Badr is memorable on the occasion on which the “prophet” first drew the sword in assertion of HIS CLAIM as the commissioned “apostle-prophet” of the most high Allah.

Against the Jewish Tribes

MEDINA, SAUDI ARABIA was founded, they say, by refugee Jews from Syria. The Jews refused to believe in the “prophet’s” claim, he summoned them to acknowledge him as the “apostle of God,” lest they should suffer the fate of the Quraish. They refused, the “prophet” pinioned them for execution. After begging for life, they were let go, but banished—their houses/goods stolen (J. Murdoch, “Arabia and Its Prophet,” 1922, p. 29).

The battle of Uhud consisted of several thousand Quraish to avenge the defeat at Badr…the Muslims were defeated in battle (Muslims had 1,000 men). The “prophet” was wounded in this fight (the Quraish believed him to be killed).

Siege of Medina

BOTH THE BEDOUINS and the Quraish made another attempt to capture Medina (10,000 man army) but again failed. During the sixth year of Hija, it is reported that there were at least 17 expeditions (of murder and plunder) to expand Islam and spread TERROR!

Battle Against the Quraiza Jews

THE “PROPHET” marched 3,000 Muslims against the Quraiza Jews, besieged, and the Jews surrendered. The men were bound, hands tied behind their backs (look at the photos of ISIS in action in Iraq/Syria right now), and were kept in one place, and the women/children put in another place. We know what “peaceful,” “tolerant,” and “compassionate” Muhammad did next—the men were BEHEADED. The prophet himself put many to DEATH (Martin Lings, “Muhammad,” 1983, pgs. 229-39).It is reported that “peaceful”/ “tolerant” Muhammad was involved in 47 battles himself. NO Old Testament or New Testament prophet ever did this. The “prophet of peace”? Jesus NEVER murdered anyone, never enslaved anyone, never stole from anyone, never raped anyone, never committed sex acts with underage girls, never took other men’s wives etc.

Conquest of Mecca

AFTER THE “PROPHET” had signed a truce (scheduled for 10 years) with the Quraish, this deceitful murderer broke it only after 2 years. In 630, he and his army set out to take Mecca. The “prophet” was unchallenged, as he entered Mecca he recited Surat al-Fath (victory) 48.

During his time at Mecca, he sent out armies to kill (murder), steal, and destroy (the same thing Jesus accused the devil of doing, see John 10:10). Khalid, his deputy, ordered a WHOLE tribe to be slain because they refused to acknowledge this murderous prophet as Allah’s prophet. Hey, this is still being done as I write.

What the sicarii and the Muslims set out to do—to bring in righteousness, was, in reality, unrighteousness—they became what they accused their opponents of being/doing…to overthrow idolatry/unrighteous mammon in order to bring in the eternal jubilee of “freedom” and “equality.”

The Rabbinic Writings

IN THE RABBINIC writings, the name “sicarii” is used of the “zealots” (see Hebrew writing). It is meant to express the VIOLENCE in attitude and acts of supporters of the first revolt (there is no mention of assassination). There is much information that can be dug up here. However, Ben Battiach, a zealot, identified by some as Simon bar Giora, is called the “daddy of assassins” in the par. b. Git., 56a. (Klausner. p. 230). A Sicarican law is also mentioned in the Rabbinical Writings in Bik., 1, 2; Git., 6, 5; S. Dt., 297 on 26:2 etc.

The sicarii in the New Testament

ACCORDING TO Acts 21:38, the tribune of the Roman cohort stationed in the Antonia believed Paul to be the Egyptian who had incited several thousand sicarii to rebel (I’ve already mentioned this. There are accounts that differ, so I won’t go into any detail here).

We might consider Acts 23:12-15: were these Jews sicarii? They had in mind to “remove” an apostate!

Church Father

HIPPOLYTUS (c. 160-235 A.D., disciple of Irenaeus) mentions the Zealots, but believes them to be a class of Essenes, not sicarii (he took his info from Josephus, see Hengel, p. 74).

Men who speak of God and His laws, but refuse circumcision, were targeted for assassination. Origen refers to the sicarii also.

Profane Slaying

Slaying of a Man

IN THE OLD TESTAMENT there were laws governing the “slaying” of both animals and men.

From Herodotus of Halicarnassus (c. 484-425 BC, the first real Greek historian), σφάζω is used for the profane slaying of a man. It is, in reality, a vivid and grisly expression for murder (like that we see coming from the ISIS or Islamic State/Boko Haram/al-Qaeda/ul-Nusra: all believe they are fulfilling their “obligation” to their god, Allah, who bids them: “Fight against those who do not believe in Allah…SLAY the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush,” (Quran [the so-called “holy” book] 9:29 and 9:5!). Our “Two Faces of Islam” books contain much information/photos of these CRAZIES! These militants ARE NOT “soldiers of God,” but of SATAN!!

There are many nuances in both the Quran/Hadiths, Holy Bible, and secular writings describing profane slaying. Euripides Andromache (Eur. Andr.) 315 uses the word “gruesomeness;” Eur. Supplices (Eur. Suppl.) uses “undeserved fate,” 813; “criminality” is used in Dio Cassius Cocceianus (Dio. C), 73, 6, 4. The Greeks thought the slaughtering of men at altars was especially heinous (see Eur. Andr., 260; Hec., 24 and Isoc. Or., 6, 67). (Note: most will not comprehend all these abbreviations, but scholars will).

σφάζω means “criminality.” So, when God had Israel to go to war (or slay a person individually for some crime done or law broken), “killing” was not considered “murder,” or “criminal.” Dio Cassius Cocceianus (Dio C.), of Nicea in Bithynia (C. 155-235 AD), a high Roman official, the author of a history of Rome in 80 books from Aeneas to his own time, used the word: “criminality” for “profane slaying,” 73, 6, 4.

This Greek word also means “massacre” after taking a city (history is full of such “murdering,” as Herodotus, of Halicarnassus (c. 484-425 BC), the first real Greek historian, described as early as Cicero, as the father of history (his work deals with the conflicts between the Greeks and the barbarians, from the earliest times to the Persian wars). He wrote about this in VIII, 127.

“Profane slaying” can be contrasted with “passionate slaying” (ἀποσφάττω), as described by Plato Euthyphro (Plat. Euthyphr.) (428/7-348/7 BC).

So, even in war there were rules to be kept (so it is even today); and “murderous atrocities” such as we see and hear about coming from the Middle East, are criminal!

“Slaughtering” men is often mentioned in lists of vices, Aeschines Tim.=Oratio in Timarchum, Athenian Orator and politician (c. 390-314 BC), who gained fame by opposing Demosthenes, 191. Much could be written here about this unjust murder/slaying.

Septuagint LXX

THIS GREEK word occurs some 84 times (39 of these 84 are in Lev., 9 in Ez., 8 in 1 Sam. and 5 in Ex. This word is rare, or not used at all in other books).

With few exceptions, it is used for the Hebrew verbs; Ugaritic and Ethiopian usage means “to SEVER the neck,” or “to slaughter,” in Arabic it means “to cook” (as the jihadists LOVE to BURN ALIVE their victims, as well as chop off body parts, leaving them to die a slow, painful death)!

The Hebrew verbs (look them up or see vol. 7, p. 930 TDNT) are used 6 times of men in the sense of “to slaughter,” “to murder.” Even when we find the word “slaughter,” it may not always be against the law of God if God had commanded it, pay attention to the text/context).

Four times we find the Hebrew word “slaughter” for the cultic slaying of men (see Gen. 22:10; Isa. 57:5; Ez. 16:21 and 23:39). It is also used for the ordinary “killing” of men, Nu. 14:16; Jud. 12:6; 1 Kgs. 18:40; 2 Kgs. 10:7, 14; 25:7; Jer. 39:6; 41:7; 52:10.

Human Sacrifices

WE’RE ALL FAMILIAR with Gen. 22:10, where God ordered Abraham to “slay” his only son. We are also familiar with Ez. 16:17-21 where Jerusalem (“adulterous”) is accused of “slaughtering” her children to the idols she had made (see also Ez. 39 and Isa. 57).

Is America any better?…she has MURDERED 60 million pre-born at the altar of sexual freedom! We (Americans) are appalled at what militant Islam has done, and IS, CURRENTLY DOING: chopping off heads, stoning to death, hanging, crucifying, burning alive, and blowing people up...why can’t we see that government-sanctioned abortion (and allowing homo AIDS carriers have free reign) is pure MURDER!!!

Non-Biblical Greek

WE’VE ALREADY looked at σφάζω= “profane slaying” of a man/men. This Greek word can also mean (in the LXX Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament) “violently” and “pitilessly” to slaughter a man, woman, or groups of such. As I write, we see the pitiful beheading of even babies/children done by the insane demon-possessed militant Muslims. But is this SIN/CRIME any worse than abortion…sponsored by and protected by the good ol USA government? And is this any worse than bombing by our airforce—blowing peoples apart that are not militant?

This whole Middle East thing is MURDEROUS. But, I need to add, Muslims have been doing this before there was an America. Muhammad was a MURDERER, pure and simple, and his spirit possesses these followers even today. Blood will continue to flow. And Israel is as guilty as the rest (they instigate much unrest that leads to all this profane slaying)!

Many point out that God is contradictory, for in Ex. 20:13 we read: “Thou shalt not kill” (KJV, but honest Bible scholars point out that “murder” is the RIGHT WORD, such as in the Amplified Bible, etc.), and in 1 Kings 18:40 we read: “And Elijah said unto them, ‘Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape.’ And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there.”

One irate Muslim writes: “It always amazes me how many times this God orders the killing of innocent people even after the 10 Commandments said ‘Thou shall not kill.’” Then this ignorant Muslim gives some examples in the Bible where God ordered “innocent people” killed. Since God is God—He made the rules, not man!—He has every right to enforce them, OR repent Himself of such when He sees fit. This is what this study is about. The prophets of Baal were not INNOCENT!

And I grant you, many times, too many times over the years, “Christians” (mostly Roman Catholics) have violated the rules/laws of God and acted on their own judgment. This has become so common today that men do exactly what they want to do, with or without God’s approval...so it is with the followers of Muhammad.

The Wisdom poem 36:14 describes how the ungodly bend their bows to slay the righteous (innocent!). We find this in the prophets, psalms, proverbs, judges, etc. (see Judges 12:6 where we find σφάζω used for a massacre in war, or civil strife etc.). According to 2 Macc. 5:12-14, Antiochus, after his Egyptian campaign in 169 BC, let loose his FURY on Jerusalem. The BUTCHERING of the Jewish population in Hellenist cities was common at the beginning of the Jewish War (see Bell., 2, 468, 547, 561; 7, 362 and 368).

Jesus Said This??-LUkE 19:27

“BUT THOSE MINE (Jesus’) enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and SLAY them before Me.” We all know that this SLAYING was done in 70 AD by the Romans. The Jewish nation was GUILTY of SLAYING/MURDERING their very own Messiah—Jesus the Christ. But, God/Jesus showed lots of patience and mercy to the Jews of those days, compelling them to be SAVED; but that nation, as a whole, REFUSED mercy (see our 2 magazines “The Wrath of God” for more on this).

You see, the Jewish nation MURDERED the innocent Lamb of God (even the Quran admits that Jesus was pure from sin); so, the Lamb of God, who, after His death, resurrection, and glorification, became the Lion out of the tribe of Judah. He was in Jerusalem, in Spirit, when God used the Romans to “slaughter” the killers of the JUST One.

In Rev. 5:6, 9, 12 and 13:8, Jesus is called “the slaughtered Lamb” in an established liturgical reference. “When Paul calls Christ our Passover in 1 Cor. 5:7, he offers very early testimony to the comparison of Jesus with the Passover Lamb. In itself, crucifixion, as distinct from execution by the sword, does not bear any close relation to slaughtering so that theological interpretation, rather than the historical event, gives rise to the image of the slaughtered Lamb” (Prof. Michel, TDNT, p. 934). “Slaughtering” is a metaphorical and very strong expression for fratricide.

σφάζω occurs in 1 John one time, and 8 times in Revelation. In reference to Luke 19:27, Prof. Michel says that “There are no forms of the pres. stem σφάζω in the New Testament. The compound in κατα- occurs in Lk. 19:27 when the king has taken dominion in his kingdom he has the enemies who tried to oppose his accession bound and slaughtered before his eyes.” Was God justified in allowing this “slaughter”? Yes! because the hateful, unbelieving Jews (especially the leadership) wanted Jesus DEAD, hoping this would STOP the New Testament dispensation: God’s salvation for the lost world. We thank God that Jesus was raised from the dead, the New Testament dispensation came in ON TIME, and souls are being (eternally) saved as I write. And the Jews have suffered through the centuries because they invoked Matt. 27:25: “Then answered all the people and said, ‘His blood be on us, and on our children.’” But Pilate washed his hands, “…saying, ‘I am innocent of the blood of this JUST person: see ye to it’” (v. 24).

Jesus was the first martyr of the New Testament revolution. The death of a martyr is compared to the slaughtering of sacrifices. The metaphor of “slaughtering” may be related more to war and murder.

Counted as Sheep for Slaughter

PSALM 44:22 reads thus: “Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter.” This image and meaning is a reality right now in Iraq and Syria…the Christians are being slaughtered (along with non-Christians).

In the shepherd allegory, God gives the command: “Feed the flock of slaughter,” (Zech. 11:4), the answer which follows is thus: “And I fed the flock of slaughter” (11:7). The concept of the lamb/sheep led to the slaughter has various nuances. In Jer. 11:19, it denotes the unsuspecting nature of the prophet complaining about the attacks of his enemies in Anathoth. In Isa. 53:7, the thought is that the Servant of the LORD does not resist or complain. But the prophet can also pray for the destruction of the ungodly: “Take them off like sheep for the slaughter, and separate them for the day of slaughter” (Jer. 12:3). Note: 1 QH 15:17 presupposes Jer. 12:3 as such: “But the ungodly hast thou created for the time of thy wrath, from the mother’s womb hast thou separated them for the day of slaughter.” Some scholars see this as apocalyptic. Isa. 30:25 and Targum (Aramaic translation or paraphrase of the Old Testament) speak of the day of great killing. Ethiopian Enoch (Eth. En.) 16:1 refers to the “days” of the massacring, destruction, and “death of the giants” (see Gen. 6:1-4) when their spirits left the carnal body to wreak destruction (see also Eth. En. 10:12).

An apocalyptical threat from the Enoch quotation in Georgius Syncellus, 26d (editor=W. Dindorf [1829], 46f.) speaks of “wrath of God” which will not leave the descendants of the men (flood generation) “until the time of the slaughter of your sons.” Here, the LAST judgment is obviously depicted under the image of “slaughter.” In Psalms of Solomon 8:1 (Ps. Sol., a Pharisaic collection of the 1st Cent. B.C., consisting of 18 songs, ed.=O. Gebhardt, 1895) is to battle cries and the sound of trumpets blowing slaughter and destruction (a historical event, some believe, is meant). Some scholar/historians believe this referred to Pompey storming Jerusalem in 63 BC. According to Sibyllines (Sib. Oracles in 14 books collected in the 5^th or 6^th Century AD for the propagation of Judaism or Christianity) 5, 379, eternal peace will be preceded by a dreadful time of cosmic disasters and destruction in war and “butchery in the darkness of night.”

Philo is to have wrote “as to cattle fattening for the slaughter” (Flaccurn 178). The slaying of enemies in war corresponds to the law. But, “murder” and “bodily injury” was a vice in De Specialibus Legibus (Spec. Leg.) II, 13.

σϕαγή

THIS GREEK WORD means the “savage killing” of men: God’s decree after the flood, and the statute for the punishment of murderers (see Ant., 1, 102). There has always been a distinction between the “legal” and the “illegal” slaying of individuals in battle, while political “murderers” are σϕαγή (see Ant. 7, 39; 9, 95; 19, 121.). Finally, σϕαγή is also used for “suicide” of the sicarii in Masada, Bell., 7, 389, 399.

Day of Slaughter

IN JAMES 5:5 we read: “Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.” This was speaking of the “rich men” (v. 1).

This verse sounds like all these FAT CATS called preachers/evangelists/etc. of today. Not all the rich are evil, but too many are; the exception are the rich who are not possessed by greed.

This “slaughter” could be eschatological judgment on Israel, as some believe, and correspond to the “day of wrath” in Rom. 2:5. Trust me, ALL who are not right with God will experience the day of wrath (if living when it comes). One might look up Isa. 34:5-8; Jer. 46:10; 50:26; Ez. 39:17; Zeph. 1:7; 1 QH 15:17; Eth. En. 94:9 (Ethiopian Enoch); 98:10; 99:6.

I think maybe James used the apoc. image sarcastically: “The rich have fattened themselves to be slaughtered on the day of divine slaughter.” Feeding off the world, which is forbidden in New Testament Times, is bound up in the idea of the eschatological day of slaughter (some believe that James was thinking of 70 AD, scholars put the Epistle of James between 45-49 AD). Of course, certain texts can have a double meaning also. Many scholar believed that 70 AD was a historical disaster, as do I.

θανατόω

THIS WORD is an old Attic word meaning: “to kill,” “to deliver up to death,” “to condemn to death” (for a study, see W. Schmirl, Der Attizismus, 1 (1887), 384; IV (1896), 251, 651). This word is used both as natural and hyperbolically (see Rom. 8:36 and 1 Peter 3:18).

θύω

THE BASIC meaning of this word is “to sacrifice.” It is also used for “to immolate” for a cultic or profane purpose (usually animals). But it also means “to slay” and “to murder” (see Euripides Iphigenia Taurica (Eur. Iph. Taur., was a tragic dramatist and philosopher of stage from Salomis near Athens, 480-406 BC). (Also see 1 Macc. 7:19, and Jn. 10:10 in the New Testament.)

Figuratively speaking, this Greek word is used in Eph. 5:2=the death of Christ (Muslims do not believe that Christ died on the Cross for our redemption) in which He offered Himself to His Father (Muslims do not believe that God has a Son, therefore He can’t be a Father). The same figure of speech is used of the life of Christians as a self-sacrificing/self-offering to God (see Rom. 12:1).

Then we have those altars (Old Testament) whereby both animals and humans were sacrificed. The Bible has much to say along these lines: some sacrifices (of animals) were ordered by God and approved by God; others were not. Amos 5:21 says: “I hate, I despise your feast days (when sacrifices were made), and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.” In v. 22, God says that He WILL NOT ACCEPT them (see also Hos. 6:6; Isa. 1:10; Jer. 7:21; 1 Sam. 15:22 etc., also in Ps. 40:6; 50:8; 51:16; 69:31 we find refusal because that material human achievement replaced personal spiritual relationship with God. Hasn’t the church come to this place? Yes! True and acceptable sacrifices are found in Ps. 50:8, 14; 51:17; 119:108; Prov. 16:6; 21:3 etc.).

The Irate Muslim

REMEMBER WHAT he said at the beginning of this study? He picks out all the texts he can to prove that the Bible is a book of contradictions, using Ex. 20:13, “thou shalt not kill.” But this commandment refers not to killing per se, but to murder (also found in Dt. 5:17). Bible scholars know that 20:13 prohibits “murder.” Even in wars where the motive is evil (like extending empire, commerce etc. Since God made this commandment, He is just when killing is done. He never leaves this matter in the hands of mere men alone.

Our ignorant Muslim counts a total of 371,186 people God directly kills and 1,862,265 God orders to be killed. If God does it or orders it done, He had the right to do so, men do not.

Even if we add these numbers together:

     371, 186

+ 1,862, 265

_______________________

     2,233,451

...this does not even come close to the amount of unborn MURDERED and sanctioned by the US gov. (it is estimated between 55-60 million today, since 1973!!).

Where Did Muhammad Get Permission to MURDER??

LIKE I SAID, the Quran/hadiths have lots to say along these lines. Well, the Islamic state, as conceived by “pious” Muslims is a religious polity established under “divine law” (of Muhammad’s mind of course). “Church” and “state” are one in the same in Islam—no separation. The coming of Islam (devised by Muhammad), was itself, a revolutionary change—it (Islam) replaced Christianity— that Jesus the “sinless,” brought to the world; he (Muhammad) replaced the “Lamb of God,” with: violence, theft, rape, torture, terror/horror etc. He created a religion that has NO! salvation for the soul—Muhammad became the “savior.” Non-Arab converts were disappointed when they found that conversion to the ruling faith did not win them acceptance as equals of the rulers—so it is even today.

Shari’a

MUSLIM RELIGIOUS/POLITICAL law—the so-called shari’a, recognizes only ONE indivisible Muslim entity, the Umma Muhammadiyya or “Muhammadite nation” (see Von Grunebaum, “Modern Islam,” pp. 277-278). In other words: “There are no nations in Islam.” But, within this we find the juxtaposition of the Dar al-Islam (“House of Islam”) and the Dar al-Harb (“House of War”). Therefore, WAR will bring in “peace, the first house). And I may tell you here and now, the “peace” Islam speaks of is WHEN ALL ENEMIES are MURDERED or have been converted to Islam!

Lex Talionis

NEAR EASTERN lex talionis, or law of retaliation, which not only left it to the individual and his immediate kin group to take REVENGE for any injury suffered, but made it their DUTY—under penalty of forfeiting their honor. Muhammad, no doubt, copied the Old Testament saying: “An eye for an eye” found in Matt. 5:38. Jesus said this, but let’s get the meaning: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth…’” But, notice the following: “But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” (read vv. 40-48 also, see if Muslims do this...or do Christians even do this?).

Jesus is not speaking against the administration of proper justice toward those who are evil (see Rom. 13:1-4 please). The verses that follow (vv. 43-48) indicate that He is referring to loving one’s enemies (v. 44; Lk. 6:27—something Islam knows nothing about. In fact “love” is hardly known in this cruel religious/political nation). What Jesus was trying to get across was: be careful how one acts/reacts when hatred is directed at us. It is one thing to protect oneself from harm, even intended death, but insults of evil must be checked. This is hard to do (as examples of this spirit, compare Gen. 13:1-13 with 14:14, and Gen. 50:18-21 with 37:18-28; see also 1 Sam. 24 and 26; Lk. 23:34; Acts 7:60).

Islam says “kill/murder those who insult or reject Islam.” Jesus and Muhammad are worlds and words apart! This is not to say that all Muslims act brutish; but a large portion of their writings deal with hating, murdering, terrorizing, enslaving, and revenge. They, for the most part, believe in “Dam butlub dam (“Blood demands blood”). This goes for non-Muslims and blood feuds among Muslims themselves.

Within the Arab mindset, we find “bravery in battle,” “patience in misfortune,” “persistence in revenge,” “protection of the weak” and “defiance of the strong.” Complementary traits of Muruwwa (manliness) were/are: loyalty, fidelity, and generosity. I think the Christian community lacks much of these today.

Bible VS Quran

I’VE WRITTEN on this subject some years ago. But, for the sake of this article, I’ll rewrite some things. Muslims think that our Bible has many contradictions—not only Muslims, but other critics as well. Kairanvi’s Izhar-ul-Haq lists 119. Shabbir Ally lists 101. The late Ahmed Deedat claimed thousands! Actually, God does not contradict Himself. It is silly for the Muslims to believe this, for their own Quran often refers to the Christian’s book. Their book refers to Jesus 97 times, in a good way, yet they put Christians to death for believing in what Jesus said.

Muhammad knew much about our Bible, so did his uncle, Waraqa Ibn Naufal. And there was Buhaira, a Nestorian monk, who was his secret teacher (who taught heresy as well as truth). There are 131 passages in the Quran in which the Bible is referred to as the Gospel, Psalms, and the Law. There are dozens and dozens of Scriptures from our Bible in which Muhammad borrowed, put an Arabic twist on, and called them “revelations” from Allah. Also, be aware that the Quran has mansukh (annulled) verses replaced later by “new” revelations (nasikh, see sura 2:106 where abrogation is mentioned). They make a BIG DEAL out of Arabic—the “perfect” language of God. However, the Quran contains many words that are not Arabic—Egyptian, Accadian, Assyrian, Persian, Syriac, Hebrew, Greek, and so on.

To make matters worse, the Quran misquotes the Old Testament and the New Testament, and misrepresents the Holy Spirit etc.

Bible Versions

MUSLIMS ALWAYS point to the many Bible versions. Deedat claimed that the Old Testament Torah (of Jews) and the New Testament Injil (Gospel) are not the same today. But neither have been changed. Maybe some words over time, but never the message. Well, take the BEAM out of your eye, Muslim, before you ask us to remove the speck out of ours! There are more than 50 versions, or translations, of the Quran.

Again, the Muslims point out all those denominations. True, there are too many! But, Islam has many, many sects as well. Why? Does this make Islam false?

If…

IF THE SO-CALLED “corruption” took place after the Quran, then anyone claiming such is saying that the Quran failed as a guard. Better check with your verses. If the Torah/Ps/prophets/epistles etc. had been corrupted AFTER the Quran, such a claim would indict you—the responsibility was given to you. The word “Guardian” refers to God’s guard as one who protects the books of God with its divine laws etc. (see Surat al-Hijr 15:9; Surat al-Fath [victory] 48:23; Surat al-kahf [The Cave] 18:27; Surah al-Baqarah [The Cow] 2:2-4; Ibid 2:136).

Before Muhammad?

I ASK, WHEN did such “corruption” take place? Before the Quran? If you say BEFORE, then the Quran places the Muslim in a real dilemma. For “Allah” commanded Muhammad to seek help from the people of the Book—the Holy Bible (see Surah yonus [Jonah] 10:94 and Surat al-Ankabut [The Spider] 29:46). There are thousands of manuscripts (off the originals) available for any and all to review/study—no changes!

The Bible

OUR HOLY BIBLE is unlike the Quran. The Quran was complied by one man (as the Muslims claim). The Bible is a compilation of 66 books (The Roman Catholics add to this), written by more than 40 authors, over a period of 1,500 years. True, there are imprints of human hands—human languages, styles, intellects etc., but no purposed corruption.

Consistency

THE QUESTION, even debate, of the internal consistency of our Bible concerns the coherence and textual integrity of the Biblical Scriptures. All those “contradictions” can be refuted. It is not my intention in this writing to do so. There is no doubt that the Bible has been under attack for years. Now we have the counterpart to the King James version—the Queen James version—for queers! In years past, such men as Thomas Paine (a real demon of a man!), Buruch Spinoza, Denis Diderot and Voltaire all believed in Biblical corruption. Deist Minister Joseph Barker used the words “the most inconsistent, the most monstrous and blasphemous representations of God that can possibly be conceived by the human mind.” Sorry demon, your words are just that!

Muslim Rashad Abdul Mahaimin, author of “Jesus and the Bible” (2003) states that we Christians need to reconsider our source of information concerning our faith. Well, his founder, and bloody prophet, Muhammad, did not think the Bible was corrupt (as I’ve already showed; look up those verses please).

The Unity of the Message?

THE QURAN mentions the Gospel as if there were only one Gospel, which is mentioned 12 times with the definite article (al). Joseph Azzi (Lebanese Christian, writer of “The Priest and the Prophet,” 2005) writes: “Several sources highlight the fact that Waraqa (Muhammad’s uncle) possessed the gospel known as the Hebrew Gospel. In fact, it is erroneous to say that he only had access to the Hebrew Gospel and not to other books like the Pentateuch, or other Gospels, nor to the Theological Nosrania teachings borrowed from the church’s oral tradition.”

SO, MUHAMMAD WAS AWARE OF THE REVELATION’S CONTINUITY. HE DID NOT BRING A NEW REVELATION FROM NOTHING—HE BORROWED (STOLE?) FROM OUR HOLY BIBLE. Sura 4:163 states: “We have sent you inspiration, as we sent it to Noah and Messengers after him; we sent inspiration to Ibrahim, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the tribes…And to David, we gave the Psalms.” A. Yusuf Ali’s “The Holy Qur’an” (1938 ed.) comments thus: “…inspiration was sent to many Messengers, and the inspiration was of the same kind as that sent to the Apostle Muhammad…every nation or group of people had an apostle” (p. 232). (See also 42:3 and 39:65.)

This last one says: “It has already been revealed to you, as it was to those before you” (see also 35:31; 29:46; 3:44; 12:102; 11:49 and 17:39). So, your prophet/apostle is not in any way special—if (and we use the word “if”) our angel revealed things to the prophet, nothing was new—Muhammad only created a new religion called “Islam.” Some point to those “mystical” aspects; this is hinted at as the “preserved table” (or al-lawh al-mahfouz [85:22], or from the “hidden book” [or al-kitab al-mok-nun], 56:78). The prophet himself did not know the “mysteries” or “hidden things” (see 6:50 and 11:31 for proof!). He declared in 27:65: “No one other than God knows the mystery or the hidden things.” So, dear deceived Muslims, why do you worship Muhammad as some GREAT SOMEBODY??

Not Only This…

MUHAMMAD RELIED upon the people of the book (Bible), but not upon the contents of the book. Quranic revelation, or that which comes down (tanzil) suggests a previous tanzil, or is an explanation (tibyan) of what has been revealed before. So, Muhammad copied what had previously been written—he refers to prophets and kings, their stories, tales, parables, explaining them the Arabic way (see 16:89; 16:44; 4:26 and 3:187). He calls the Scriptures of the People of the Bible (Ahl al-Kitab) as a witness (see 6:114 and 34:6). This last one ought to convince us that the prophet of Islam did not think the Bible had been corrupted: “Those to whom knowledge has come, see that revelation sent down to you from your Lord—that is THE TRUTH.” The complete verse says: “…and that it guides to the Path of the Exalted, worthy of all praise.”

Sadly, Muhammad listened to and believed in certain “Christian” sects that did not believe in certain doctrines of the Bible (like the trinity). He had contact, no doubt, with Roman Catholics as well as Nosronias, Ebionites. The Ebionism (sect of Jewish Nazarenes) followed Jesus but did not believe in His divinity, nor His divine sonship. This is why Muslims refuse to believe in Jesus’ divinity.

Then there was Cerinthism. Its founder, Cerinthus, taught that Jesus would free the Jews from Rome. He also taught a carnal idea about paradise—to give sex to human bodies. Muhammad adopted this one!

Elkasai, who founded Elkasaism, taught that Jesus was a mere human. He taught that the Holy Spirit could either be Gabriel or Christ’s mother. Again, Muhammad adapted some of these teachings.

Ask The People of the Book!

SURE 16:44 and 21:7 reveals much. “The people of the Book” were Jews and Christians. 6:90 states: “They are those who receive God’s guidance in the straight path. Follow their guidance.” But Muslims put both Jews and Christians to death.

Compromises!

At one time Muhammad believed in equality: “Say: O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you” (3:64). He went on to say: “We have made it open to all (men) in equality” (22:25). Then we read this: “They have become equal in that respect” (16:71); “Your parts are equal” (30:28); “Every people will be called before its book” (45:28, the Arabic reads: “And thou wilt see every sect bowing the knee: Every sect will be called to its Record: ‘This Day shall ye be recompensed for all that ye did!’” A. Yusuf Ali comments on this sura saying: “…the time will come when they (sects) will humbly submit and bow the knee to the Truth…before the judgment seat” (p. 1362). The “Truth” was and is the Holy Bible, yet Muslims teach that their book is Truth. Of course this has caused much division among them.

After Muhammad’s Death

AS MUCH AS the prophet worked at “unity,” it failed. After his death (632 AD in Medina), there arose inner war—from 3 groups...who would be his successor?

1-  Shil’a=followers of Ali the prophet’s cousin/son-in-law;

2-  ‘Ubadah al-Khazraji;

3-  Abu Bakr, who would strengthen his hold on the Caliphate.

It was after his death that the Quran was compiled. Also, greater hostilities broke out against non-believers (esp. Arabs and People of the Book, plus “Christian” sects that held heretical beliefs).

During this time of “terrorism,” the Caliph ‘Uthman Ibn Affan tried to unify Islam. He was the Muslim who undertook the job to unify the Quran (which had been written). Most people do not know that the early Qurans were burned (a few survived and can still be read—but much does not match up to the standardized ones).

WAR: JIHAD/TERRORISM

UNDER WARAQA’S version, jihad was not preeminent, but under ‘Uthman’s version, the Quran promoted “offensive jihad” positions. This Quran is what Muslims use today (check out Sura 5:82). What most people do not know is that when Muhammad lived first in Mecca, he proclaimed unity—peace (if possible)—a live-and-let-live attitude. This was in his “weak” stage. After living in Medina, he grew strong and proud and marched on his enemies at Mecca…the switch from the “peaceful Islam,” to the “sword Islam,” got under way. The “peaceful” suras were abrogated. So, “The Sword” won out!

Sadly, while at Mecca the second time, his attitude changed—especially against the Jews/Christians. It was at the end of his life that he proclaimed with all power: “Say, ‘All praises to God, who has not son and no partner in his kingdom” (17:111), setting the future stage for WAR/JIHAD/MURDER against those who believe in the Father-Son-Holy Ghost, see also 10:68; 18:4; 19:35, 88, 91, and 92; 21:26; 23:91; 25:2; 39:4; 43:81; 72:3 and 112:3—all these are anti-divine sonship. So, dear Christians (Jews don’t believe in Jesus at all!!), ISLAM, AS IT STANDS TODAY, IS IN NO WAY COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY.

If one will compare the early Qurans with today’s standardized book, one will see why ‘Uthman destroyed those early ones.

We Ask…

“IS THE QURAN the unaltered Word of God sent directly from Heaven?” They claim it is. Try to argue it out, you may lose your head!!!

What most people are not aware of is that in 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of Sana’a in Yemen, a remarkable gravesite was found—of books in Arabic, individual pages of documents etc. They actually filled 20 potato sacks, later given over to Qadhi Isma’il al-Akwa’, then president of the Yemeni Antiquities Authority.

In 1979, a German scholar had permission for restoration of this finding—the “paper grave.” Some of the parchment pages dated back to the 7th/8th centuries AD (Islam’s first 2 centuries). They were pronounced the oldest Qurans in existence…they revealed intriguing aberrations from the standard Quranic text, as already stated. Theses findings are at odds with the orthodox Muslim belief today.

In 1981, Gerd R. Puin, a specialist in Arabic calligraphy and Quranic paleography (Germany), found unconventional verse orderings, textual variations, and rare styles of orthography and artistic embellishment (written in Hijazi Arabic script: pieces of the earliest Qurans known to exist). Puin believed in the end that the Yemeni Qurans were an “evolving” text rather than simply the “word of God” as “revealed” in its entirety of the prophet in the 7th century.

Why don’t we hear about this great find? I’ll tell you why: it would smash Islam’s claim of divine revelation.

Other professors of religious studies (world wide) state: “These manuscripts say that the early history of the Quranic text is much more of an open question than many have suspected. The text was less stable, and therefore had less authority than has always been claimed” (for all details, write for our booklet “New Light on the History of the Quran” free, 22 pages).

No Compulsion?

SURA 2:256 was written when Muhammad, surrounded by enemies, was moderate in his teachings: “There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.”

Much has been said about this verse. Some comments are printed in our (free upon request) “Offensive Warfare to Spread Islam” booklets. Some think that he meant that no one is forced to embrace Islam...but if you do, you can’t defect; and if you do, you die! And sure enough, APOSTATES DIE! This sura was written while Muhammad was in his “weak” stage; in his “strong” stage, when his power and dominion was established, the Muslims offered the non-Muslims 3 options:

1- accept Islam

2- pay life time tribute

3- die by the sword (see the Repentance sure v. 29; see also our many booklets/magazines/DVDs on The Sword/Terror etc…such as 4:84; 8:60; 9:29; 2:193; 5:33; 9:30; 8:55 etc. The Quran says of Christians: “The WORST of BEASTS in the sight of Allah.” Now you can see WHY ISIS or the Islamic States/al-Qaeda/al-Nusra Front/Boko Haram etc. MURDER without feelings! This will come to America more and more folks. Get ready!

Back to“Thou shalt not murder.”

THE KING JAMES VERSION Bible does the world a disfavor by using “kill” rather than “murder” (Bibles such as the Amplified, ESV, NASB, NCV, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV etc. all use “murder.” The Hebrew word here in Ex. 20:13 for “kill” is “ratsach” (Strong’s H7523). It is translated into English many different ways— depending on the context (some of which I’ve already shown): “slayer” 17 times, “murder” 13, “kill” 4, “murder” 3, “slain” 3, “manslayer” 2, “death” 1, “killed” 1, “killing” 1, “murderers” 1, “slayeth” 1.

The Difference?

“MURDER”=the unlawful taking of life; “killing”=the lawful taking of life.

I’m not an advocate of war or anything violent. I’ve spent the last 43+years in the ministry trusting God for His protection. We’ve been in war zones, and in life/death situations etc. without a weapon. I hope I can finish my course this way. But, what does the Bible say about war/self-defense etc.?

SELF-DEFENSE: Ex. 22:2: “If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.” There shall be no blood guiltiness on defending one’s property or life.

KILLING: Ex. 20:13 is quoted in Rom. 13:9 as “you shall not murder” (correct translation). The Greek word for “murder” here (not “kill,” which is not correct) is “phoneuo”—ϕονεύω (Strong’s G5407). The word for “kill” in Matt. 10:28 is “apoktinumi.” There are different words used for “murder”/”kill.”

The Big Picture

SOME ACCUSE God of being unjust. First of all, God is the Creator, we are the created. He makes the laws/rules, and we’re to follow them. Humanists don’t like this. Too bad!

ALL (humans) have sinned (if one lives long enough to do so). Even infants are born as sinners (the sinful seed/nature had been passed down from generation to generation), all are GUILTY. Rom. 3:23 says: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” That “glory” refers to man’s original state/estate, as created in God’s likeness. Paul uses the expression “the image and glory of God” (1 Cor. 11:7).

The Bible is not devising a particularly pessimistic theory about “all have sinned;” it is interpreting admitted facts in terms of a particular point of reference. Man was made for something different from the kind of life which he/she has achieved, which Paul describes in cpts. 1 and 2. We can regain that eternal life—endless, divine quality—by accepting Christ as we REPENT of our sins.

What the Bible declares is that since all have sinned (or were born sinners), ALL are under the judgment of God: “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23), so when God sees fit to kill someone, or someones, it, in His sight, is not murder. HIS EXECUTION IS LAWFUL. We’ve got to get out of our humanistic mentality and see things in the right light. God does not MURDER, nor expect/command His people to do so. Period! The Hebrew word for “murder” literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person or persons with malice.”

Penal Codes

WE SHOULD ALL KNOW THIS.

PC 187= Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.

Wow! are the abortionists listening. Well, we all know that they don’t murder with malice, don’t we? Killing a preborn is cold-blooded/cold-calculated MURDER. Period!

Malice is a form of evil intent that separates “murder” from “killing.” Even today there are acceptable forms of killing that lack this kind of evil intent, and these forms of killing exist as exceptions in the murder laws of the United States. In California, for example, a homicide is justified (according to Penal Code sections 187,196 and 197) if one of the following conditions is met:

A person kills someone accidentally

A person is trying to defend him or herself and prevent his or her own murder (self-defense)

A person is trying to prevent someone from entering his or her house to commit some violent felony

A person is trying to prevent the murder of someone else (protecting an innocent)

In all these situations, killing is actually legal and justifiable, and exceptions of this nature exist in the Penal Codes of every state in America. Even those who don’t accept the existence of God or the authority of the Bible recognize the necessity for laws like these; laws that allow for deadly force to be used to accomplish some greater good.

It’s interesting to note, however, these exceptions are not the invention of modern humans; they are simply a reflection of ancient Biblical Law. The Bible is the source for these modern laws and the exceptions come straight from the pages of scripture:

An accidental killing is not murder:

EXODUS 21:12-13:

“Anyone who strikes a man and kills him shall surely be put to death. However, if he does not do it intentionally, but God lets it happen, he is to flee to a place I will designate.”

Numbers 35:22-25:

“But if without hostility someone suddenly shoves another or throws something at him unintentionally or, without seeing him, drops a stone on him that could kill him, and he dies, then since he was not his enemy and he did not intend to harm him, the assembly must judge between him and the avenger of blood according to these regulations. The assembly must protect the one accused of murder from the avenger of blood and send him back to the city of refuge to which he fled.”

A killing performed in self-defense, or in defense of one’s home, is not murder:

EXODUS 22:2:

“If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed.”

A killing performed in an attempt to save the life of an innocent person is not murder:

Exodus 2:11-12:

“ONE DAY, after Moses had grown up, he went out to where his own people were and watched them at their hard labor. He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people. Glancing this way and that and seeing no one, he killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.” (God did not judge Moses as a murderer because he was protecting the life of the slave.)

Genesis 14:14-16:

“When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the 318 trained men born in Ms household and went in pursuit as far as Dan. During the night Abram divided his men to attack them and he routed them, pursuing them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus. He recovered all the goods and brought back his relative Lot and his possessions, together with the women and the other people.” (God did not judge Abram as a murderer because he was protecting the life of Lot.)

Killing becomes murder when (and only when) it is not properly justified, and the justifications are clear: you can use whatever force necessary to protect your own life from a hostile aggressor, or to save the life of an innocent from such imminent, life-threatening danger. The difference between the legal or illegal use of deadly force is really a matter of motive, intent and justification, and these distinctions come straight from the pages of Scripture.

Muslim Brotherhood

WE HAVE PRINTED articles about this sinister cult who founded CAIR (“terrorists in suits”), who clandestinely work in and out of the US government. Counsel on American-Islamic Relations is the inner sanctum of the Muslim mafia here…and Obama supports them!

P. David Gaubatz, a US veteran who served 12 years as a Special Agent with the US Air Force, went underground in CAIR (as a civilian federal agent after returning from Iraq). He has told Americans that the Islamic radicals intend to infiltrate all areas of this nation. I’ve said this back in the early 90's, all the way to this, day (2015). He was told by the Muslims that America would come under sharia law. He also has secret documents proving what he heard. This nation, dear readers, is full of sleeper cells, and secret agents…WAITING to MURDER!!

Sue Myrick, member of the US congress writes in Gaubatz and Sperry’s “Muslim Mafia” book this forward:

“It is very alarming that we actually have the enemy’s playbook for their so-called “Grand Jihad” against North America, yet we refuse to seriously confront the threat to our sovereignty and our way of life. We Americans must wake up before it is too late!”

Gaubatz learned Arabic, and worked alongside CAIR officials, but thank God, he found out that he was actually working alongside Islamic terrorists in suits. He launched a counter-intelligence operation at CAIR’s HQ—the Belly of the BEAST!

Too Proud!!

OUR NATIONAL SECURITY folks just can’t come to grips with the fact that they are LOSING, not WINNING. God told us back in 1991 that America would not WIN the war (first invasion/second invasion, now here we are—2015—still Losers! One needs to see/hear my wife’s 1991 messages called Harbinger of Prophecy (dealing in part with the Gulf War). She repeats what the Holy Spirit spoke to us that the war would drag on. And true to His Word, the war is still dragging on, and on, and on (I realize the cause is that the US government/One Worlders have their dirty hands in on this evil. Nevertheless, God’s Word was/is true—order your free copy today).

We’re hearing a lot about sharia law these days. No surprise, your prez has his dirty hands in on this. Don’t be a bit surprised that militant Islam becomes common place here. I’ve been saying this since the early 1980's. But who is listening? Hello! Anybody home?? All one has to do is see what is going on today, heads are rolling!

Enough Said

THERE IS NO doubt that the Islamists are murderers! One memo previously classified by the FBI concerning the Muslim Brotherhood reads:

“This faction of Muslims have declared war on the US, Israel, and any other country they deem as an enemy of Islam…” The memo continues: “The common bond between these various organizations is both religious and political, with the underlying common goal being to further the holy war—Islamic Jihad.”

We offer free materials to any and all who will distribute them about Islam: tracts, booklets, magazines, CDs/DVDs. We are not afraid to expose this CRIMINAL conspiracy, nor are we ashamed to stand tall for our Saviour—Jesus Christ.

THESE BRAZEN MURDERERS NEED TO REPENT! We not only expose their false Quranic teachings, but plead for their souls in prayer. We have seen, over the years, many come to Christ.

Join the fight—become an ACMTC freedom fighter. Islam enslaves; Christianity saves! Amen.