“There is no god but allah and muhammad is his messenger…”
Sunni scholars, the intrepid defenders of faith, claim that sunni (Medina sect) is the true islam.
Did allah said sunni (Medina sect) is the true islam!?
NO! HE DID NOT SPECIFY ANYTHING TO THAT SORT!
WHICH AMONG VARIOUS ISLAMIC SECT IS THE TRUE ISLAM!?
True islam has this distinction:
Firstly, true islam consists of the believer of ahl-al sunna, the words and practices of muhammad, which by it, they are qualified as sunni.
They are the main body of believers, the greater in number amongst the prophesied 73muslim sects, that would emerge.
TRUE ISLAM has two distinct feature. Firstly, it is Sunni. Secondly, it is the main body of Muslim believers.
Which among various Islamic sect is sunni?!
I know two, these are:
- Sunni (Medina sect)
ISIS as sunni:
The other feature of true islam is, it is the main body. The dilemma is, is it the main body without a caliph (sunni of medina) or the main body with a caliph (ISIS)?!
It was not specified.
But then, in reference to prophecy, Muhammad foretold the corruption of the islam sect, referring to the one that originated from his time, the sunni of medina, therefore the mainstream sunni now, the medina sect, is a corrupt islam, as it say,
Bec the Sunni of medina was corrupted, it would be replaced by another group, as it say,
The one that replaced it, is ISIS, another sunni group.
But then, sunni scholars (medina sect) claim that ISIS is not true islam as they say,
These scholars asked ISIS, who gave you authority over the Muslim ummah?!
I’ll ask the same for these scholars, who gave you authority over the Muslim ummah?!
Sunni (Medina sect) claimed they are the true islam. ISIS claimed they are the true islam! The new caliphate as foretold by Muhammad.
Who then is telling the truth?!
We can answer that if we know what is true islam!
THIS IS TRUE ISLAM:
- Muhammad can kill anyone even if it was not commanded by Allah nor has any Quranic sanction. He could kill according to his personal desire even if it was not ordered by allah. It was exemplified when he massacred captives from banu quraisha by allowing Sa’ad, a non-muslim, to make verdict. Allah has no such Quranic sanction for Muhammad to kill by virtue of a non-muslim’s verdict. Therefore, allah allowed leaders of islam, to authorized killing by way of their personal decision, even without quranic sanction, muhammad being the pattern of conduct as an Islamic ethic. Complete explanation here: CLICK ME!
- Muhammad can kill anyone through presumption of guilt, as exemplified when he massacred boys as he guessed who was liable of penal responsibility through the presence of pubic hair and spared boys without pubic hair, bec these were not liable of penal responsibility. Complete explanation here: CLICK ME!
What is penal responsibility?
It is having age of reason to understand that a criminal act is liable for penalty. It is the necessary component that makes a person guilty of a crime and the reason that he must be killed.
Muhammad regarded the ones with pubic hair as liable of penal responsibility. He thought, they are of the right age, to have understanding that criminal acts are meant for penalties!
Was he correct that all these youngsters with pubic hair is in the right age of understanding?!
No! Bec scientifically, even with pubic hair, sometimes their mental age is below their actual physical age, therefore even with pubic hair, their mental reasoning, understanding, could still be that of a 9years old or 10, therefore not liable of penal responsibility.
Therefore muhammad guessed that having pubic hair guarantees guilt of a crime when in fact he was wrong bec having pubic hair doesnt guarantee that one is in the right mind to understand right or wrong. Some have mental age that is below than their physical age, thus they have not yet the capacity to understand so as science have declared! Thus having pubic doesnt necessarily mean, he is guilty of a ctime!
Therefore, being a pattern of conduct, true islam allows killing by means of presumption of guilt, or guessing who is guilty, then kill them!
- Muhammad killed boys with pubic hairs and spared those with none. He did it even if allah did not say, “when warriors are boys, kill those only with pubic hair.” NONE! HE DID NOT! Therefore, it is Islamic to kill by personal decision whoever the leader thinks is guilty, and spare those he thinks is innocent, even without Allah’s sanction!
- Allah sanctioned the killing of those that spread falsehood against allah or muhammad. It is practiced by Saudi sharia. Therefore, Christians spreading alleged lies as islam is false, allah is demonic, muhammad is false prophet must likewise be killed. Complete explanation here:
- Muhammad consented the killing of an innocent person bec she insulted him.
- Islam uses compulsion of religion, by forcing christians not to practice their religion in Medina but allows it in other places. Therefore, wherever islam declared a place as “only islam domain” no other religion is allowed meaning, islam has right to impose “only islam domain” on their territories even for the whole world if ever they chooses such as how they do in Saudi Arabia!
- That is true islam!
Sunni (Medina sect) don’t do those fully thus conclusively as muhammad imposed, this sunni sect is the prophesied corrupted version of islam. ISIS on the other hand fits perfectly to this true islamic nature. They kill anyone by their own personal decision by the caliph Abu bakr. They kill Christians when they were considered kufar, and not innocent.
What are possible objections?!
Allah said not to destroy buildings and specifically, NOT TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE!
Who are innocent in true Islamic logic?
Muhammad can kill by personal decision even without Quranic sanction.
Muhammad guessed who are guilty of death. Therefore, he guessed who are innocent from not. Therefore, it is by muhammad or the leader of islam, who would proclaim who are innocent from not by mere guess.
Muhammad decided who are guilty or innocent by his personal decision, without Allah’s decision or order, therefore it is by the leader who decides who are guilty or innocent.
Who are therefore innocent?
Those that the leader proclaimed as innocent. If you kill someone not labeled as guilty you killed innocent people. Therefore whoever the leader spared is logically, the ones considered innocent. And whoever, he labeled guilty are not innocent, even if his crime is simply, insulting allah or muhammad or spreading false news such as how muhammad consented the killing of someone whose only crime is insulting muhammad.
ISIS destroys churches. Is it Islamic when allah said, do not destroy buildings?
Yes! Islamic. Selective destruction of churches.
Do you not destroy churches if ever they would erect one in Medina?
Selective in the sense that, if the leader decides that only islam is the accepted religion in a selected place as an islamic truth such as what happens in medina, it should be authoritative. Meaning, islam could proclaim any place they rule over as “only islam domain” as what happens in Saudi arabia therefore, it must be authoritative. Thus when ISIS, being true islam if ever it wants islam as the only religion in the world, no other religion is therefore allowed wherever they have power thus the elimination of any traces of it. Thus the destruction of church edifices.
That is the context of what allah said, don’t destroy churches! It means don’t destroy churches where the leader has not sanctioned an “only islam domain” but where it is imposed, no other religion must coexist with islam!
With these reality, logical and empiric, who between sunni (medina sect) and ISIS is true islam??
Who kills people by guessing who is guilty of death, (such as the “pubic hair” incident) and who kills even without quranic sanction but by personal decision (such as massacre accdg to the non-muslim’s verdict)?!
Who kills by being the ones deciding who is guilty or innocent through the presumption of the leader (such as the “pubic hair” incident)!?
Who kills anyone by being the one deciding who is guilty or innocent even without Allah’s approval or Quranic sanction such as in the “pubic hair” incident?!
Therefore by being fittingly, compliant to the abovementioned qualifiers, and as sunni (Medina sect) fails, muhammad therefore through his prophecy, confirmed ISIS as true Islam, the replacement of the one that originated from Muhammad’s time, the medina sect being a corrupt islam!
For speaking against ISIS, who give you authority as a representative of true islam!?
Note: Excerpts are not mine. These are photographs from various blogsites. Trace the sources by typing portions of the excerpts in your browsers!