Isn't the answer obvious?

Submitted by Multatuli (United States), Nov 1, 2002 at 21:11

Most of the postings here seem to fall in one of three categories:
1) Non-muslims asking "how can I make sense of Muslim atrocities?"
2) Non-muslims explaining "these atrocities aren't related to real Muslims at all"
3) Muslims, when saying anything at all, sighing "if you don't understand, there's no sense in explaining"

To me, it seems quite simple. Struggle is inherent to Islam . It is explicitly called out repeatedly in the Koran. And ... the Koran is the literal word of Allah to all Muslims. In this sense, all Muslims are "fundamentalists". The Koran is what it is, and cannot be changed or updated. Nor can it be deviated from. Every practicing Muslim must follow the precepts of the Koran. That does not mean all Muslims will kill infidels. But, the moderates will not condemn killing infidels either. They cannot and still be Muslim. The parallel to Muslim martyrs in Christianity would be missionaries. Everyone can't be a missionary. And sometimes missionaries are a bit extreme in their efforts. But how could a Christian condemn an over-zealous missionary who is doing God's work? That's why Muslims are silent on the killings. Some moderates can condemn the "over-zealous" act, but they could never condemn the martyr. The martyr is closest to Muhammad as a model for men, by the words of the Koran.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".