As highlighted in earlier chapters, faith can recognize the dissimilarities that exist between good and evil. Any person who is willing to be honest needs no priest or caliph when it comes to distinguishing the facets of right and wrong. Individual faith is fully capable of judging the worthiness of what may be observed in a social context or what may be read from a sacred script.

Many Muslims who have converted to Christianity have remarked in their testimonies that the Islamic mind does not know peace. It is not possible for Muslims to have the tranquility of heart that is enjoyed every day by the typical Christian. Why is this? Primarily, it is because the doctrines of Islam coerce their people to defy the signal of faith.

For example, faith knows murder to be wrong. To command a person to commit murder, when faith knows it to be wrong, is to force conflict and discord into the mind. Now it is true that the Koran teaches that murder is wrong. The Islamic holy book says in Surah II, 190, "Allah loveth not aggressors." Again in Surah VII, 55, it says that Allah "loveth not aggressors." Thus one can conclude from the Koran that murder is wrong -- wrong that is, unless one murders for the cause of Allah. Indeed, Allah "loveth not aggressors," except when the Koran says the opposite, as it does in Surah LXI, 4, "Lo! Allah loveth those who battle for His cause in ranks...." If the logic seems a bit perplexing here, note Surah VIII, 67-69, where it says it would be wrong of Muhammad to just go out and kidnap wives and children, while the husbands and fathers were still living. However, if he killed off the husbands and fathers before he took the wives and children, the Koran assures him it would be okay. Note carefully how the Koran phrases it. Surah VIII, 67 makes it quite graphic: "It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land." Did you catch that word, “slaughter”?  The word would serve well to describe what happened on September 11, 2001, would it not?

Many civil minded Muslims have done their best to gloss over and play down the violence, the gore, and the carnage that is linked to their founding prophet; but it simply cannot be done. There is just too much of it. Muhammad personally led 27 violent raids and planned and oversaw 38 others, (Ibid, p. xvii-xxix.) all the while his followers pleaded with him to stop the fighting. His warriors implored him, "Our Lord! Why hast thou ordained fighting for us? If only thou would give us respite yet a while!" (Surah IV, 77.) As ghastly as it may sound, Surah IX, 20 says that those who war for Allah are of a higher degree. Equally gruesome, Surah XLVII, 20, says "woe unto them" who balk at slaying their fellowman at the command of Muhammad. Hence, Muhammad threatened people who did not want to kill for him by saying, "Flight will not avail you if ye flee from... killing...," as he warns in Surah, XXXIII, 16. Then all through Surah XLVII, Muhammad extols those who have no compunction against killing another human being, while excoriating those who are distressed by even the thought of it.  

As I read such things from the Koran, I am reminded of what Jesus said to Pilate. "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight." (John 18:36, KJV.) Do not the words of Jesus tell us plainly in what realm resides the kingdom of Muhammad? Right now in the Sudan, there are Muslim bands making raids on Christian communities, taking their livestock as booty and their children as slaves. And shockingly they do it as a service to Allah. They make their raids screaming, "Allah is Great." After a while, one gets the distinct impression that their Allah is great alright -- a great killer, and a great thief, and a great enslaver. These Muslim marauders could have easily gained their inspiration for their strong-arm forays into the Sudan from Surah XXXIII, 26-27, which says, "some ye slew, and ye made captive some. And He caused you to inherit their land and their houses and their wealth...." Yes, the Koran gives the Islamic fundamentalists, or any Muslim for that matter, permission to commit heinous acts all in the name of Allah. Understandably, there are millions of Muslims who want to keep a safe distance from this Allah, whoever he is, for he is a bloodthirsty tyrant.    

Further, not only are Muslims exhorted to kill their enemies, and any unbeliever who may be a threat or a hinderance to Islam, but they are also exhorted to kill their own kind for the same reasons. Remember the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who like a mob boss of some crime syndicate, put out a contract on Salmon Rushdie that he be killed by any Muslim having knowledge of his whereabouts. If a Christian leader had called for this kind of macabre, he would have been placed in a mental hospital or incarcerated in a prison so that society might be protected from his madness. Understandably, some devout Muslims would like to excuse the atrocious command of the Ayatollah as an aberration to authentic Islam. Although the attempt can be appreciated, in all honesty the actions of Khomeine appear to be the norm of Islamic religious leaders rather than the exception. Even as I write this, a German court has convicted four Islamic assassins for murdering four Iranian dissidents in Berlin. (The Sun Herald, Tuesday, April 15, 1997, p. A-3.) In Arabic countries, people are not permitted to say anything against the Muslim religion, no matter how true it may be. One gets the idea that the foundation of Islam is so weak it cannot stand on its own merits. It must be propped up by murderous threats and other acts of terror whenever confronted with the facts of Truth. On June 8, 1996, an Islamic judge in the nation of Kuwait ruled that Robert Hussein be killed by religious leaders for his allegiance to Jesus Christ. Immediately Hussein went into hiding. His wife was raped by devout -- I repeat -- devout Islamic men. His house was destroyed by, likewise, devout Islamics. His assets worth four-million dollars were justifiably confiscated by Islamic law. (Pastor's Update, a publication of the Southern Baptist Foreign Mission Board, August-September 1996, p. 2.)The reason fundamentalist Muslims are so hostile toward Christians says Robert Hussein is that "they know we are right and they are wrong." (Pastor's Update, Foreign Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, August - September, 1996, p. 2.) Anis Shorrosh supports Hussein by saying, "Islam is the most insecure religion on earth." (The Baptist Record, Shorrosh Weathers Danger from Challenging Islam, by Bruce Sims, February 15, 1996, p. 1.) Shorrosh goes on to intimate that Islamic leaders must keep their people cut off and isolated from the free world under the pretense that it is Allah's will, so that they might not desert the religion. Equally as bad, Muslim leaders cannot afford to publish the Koran in people's native languages for fear they will read it and find many of its Surahs woefully obsolete, if not horrific.     

As hard as it may be for a person of Christian sensibilities to ingest, it is true. Any cruel or evil act can be committed by devout Islamics, if they can in some way rationalize that they are protecting the sovereignty of their god, Allah. Just think of it. Does the sovereignty of the Islamic god have to be protected by violent acts of his followers? If the power of Allah is to be found in acts of Islamic “jihad,” then his power lies in what Christians would call “human depravity,” rather than Divine Truth. Perhaps this is the underlying reason that Muhammad stated in the Koran that Muslims were to be "harsh" to unbelievers. The Koran commands all Islamic to show hostility toward Christians or any other religious group for that matter. Many people throughout the world today, including many non-fundamentalist Muslims, find it hard to believe that this could actually be written down in the Koran. Nevertheless, it is there in bold script. However, it is not available for all the world to read as I have said. Under the guise of protecting its sacredness, Muslim clerics forbid that an unbeliever even touch the Koran. (Baptist Record, Faces and Places, Anne Washburn McWilliams, October 22, 1992, p. 6.) In Surah XLVIII, 29, we read "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers...." This may be a bit of an understatement, since those who would not believe in Muhammad in the seventh century were either murdered or enslaved. "We verily shall urge thee on against them... they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter," says Surah XXXIII, 60-61. Again we read in Surah IX, 123, "fight...them...and let them find harshness in you...." Still again we read in Surah XXXIV, 33, "We place carcans on the necks of those who disbelieved." And if these Surahs were not enough, it is stated still again in Surah XXXVI, 8, "Lo! We have put on their necks carcans reaching unto the chins...." Of course, carcans were chains or bands typically placed on the necks of captives taken during Muslim attacks. Those not killed during the assault were the ones made slaves, usually women and children.    

This harsh, brutal, persecuting approach to unbelievers is a far cry from the disposition that Jesus Christ exhibited toward unbelievers. Jesus said, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to

them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." (Matthew 5:43-44, KJV.) Is it possible for the reader to miss the bold contrast that exists between Jesus and Muhammad? With regard to enemies that persecute, Jesus said "pray" for them. Muhammad said "slaughter" them. Incidentally, the Koranic teaching on persecution is found in Surah II, 190-191, where Muhammad says "Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you..., and slay them wherever ye find them...for persecution is worse than slaughter... and fight them until persecution is no more." It is plain as day. The words of Muhammad venture far afield from the life affirming, nonviolent, loving, and patient words of Jesus. It should be noted that the reasoning behind what Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount is based on how God, the Heavenly Father, treats all people in general. "That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others: do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect," (Matthew 5:45-48, KJV.) "for he is kind to the unthankful and to the evil." (Luke 6:35, KJV.) Can anyone miss the striking differences between Jesus and Muhammad?    

The main reason, or maybe I should say excuse, that Islamic religious leaders have forbade the translation of the Koran into other languages over the centuries has been that it simply can't be done. Too much would be lost, since Arabic is the language of God. Besides, they espouse it would have been sacrilege to corrupt the Koran with the unholy tongues of the world. O, come now, please! As John Stossell would say, “Give me a break!”

Let us now consider a better method of evangelization, a non-victimizing alternative to Muhammad's vicious style of dealing with unbelievers. The better method to which I refer is none other than the one used by Jesus. The founder of Christianity instructed His followers this way: "Whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.... Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." (Matthew 10:14-16, KJV.) The approach that Jesus chose to evangelize the world was simply that of speaking the Truth and being harmless about it. The Lord of Christianity knew that if conversions were not produced by the sheer Truth of the Gospel and faith's response to it, then they would be superficial, false, and worthless. Admittedly, the Church at times in history practiced evangelization by force, similar to that of the Muslims. But even though people of Christendom, like Constantine and the Crusaders, engaged in forced conversions, the Church was in flagrant violation of their founder's teaching. The method of making converts through coercion is simply not taught in the New Testament.    

Perhaps it should be noted that Mahatma Gandhi revered the teachings of Christ above those of Muhammad. Anyone even partially familiar with Mahatma's life will know this. Gandhi led India out from under British colonial rule and into a democratic nation without ever having to resort to violence. The India political leader repudiated Muhammad's methods of coercive evangelization. He deplored the harshness, brutality and war identified with Islamic beginnings. On one occasion, the humble Hindu statesman was heard to say that if everybody lived by the well-known precept "'an eye for an eye' [a precept reverenced and heeded by Muslims and Jews in their skirmishes between one another until this very hour] soon the whole world would be blind." Of course, Gandhi never officially became a Christian. He once gave an explanation for that. He simply said that had he ever met a Christian, he might have become one. Gandhi was testifying to the cold hard fact that the Christians he knew did not follow the teachings of Jesus. Yet he himself followed the teaching as laid down in the Sermon on the Mount, validating the preeminence of the Galilean Teacher, while placing in Judgment the “insincere” Christians he had met.

The modern world has become a global village. All citizens of earth, Muslims in particular, are now learning that the Islamic religion is a tyranny of the people. The New Testament states "for freedom, Christ has set us free." (Galatians 3:1, RSV. ) Again the Christian text says, "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and wherever the Spirit of the Lord (is) there (abides) freedom." (II Corinthians 3:17, author's translation .) Christ has set us free to pursue the Truth of God in all of its beauty, and majesty. Occasionally, however, due to the sinful inclination of some Church leaders, even Christians are denied what Christ makes available through faith. In contrast to this, however, the Muslim masses have not yet tasted of the freedom that Christ brings to life. Sadly, the Islamic religion is oppressive on a wise not greatly removed from that of twentieth century Russian communism, which kept Slavic people in subjection by fear and brutal intimidation. The coercive pressure of a communistic regime, however, was not strong enough to hold the people captive. After 70 years, communism in Russia collapsed as a viable government because the subjected people had been Christians prior to their bondage. There lingered in their minds a taste for Truth, which in the final analysis set them free. By comparison, the terror and teachings of the Islamic religion are now being exposed to the elements of the Gospel; namely, Truth, freedom and hope. And like Russian communism, the “oppressive nature” of the Islamic society is destined to collapse.

Today, many Muslims already know -- through the knowing that comes by faith -- that the New Testament offers a nobler theology and a higher ethic than can be found in their sacred book. Yet, they still cringe in their closets with this knowledge because they fear for their lives and the lives of their families. Even so the day is coming, and it is not that far away, when the freeing Christ is going to set Muslims free from the evil that has kept them cowering in ignorance for fourteen centuries. For sure, Jesus Christ is going to non-violently, lovingly, and Truthfully triumph over the Islamic religion.