Why Jihadists attacked Strasbourg Christmas market

Why Jihadists attacked Strasbourg Christmas market.

Lizzie and Mohammed Lamin have a conversation about the recent jihad attack in Strasbourg.

“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed.” (Sura 9:111, Sahih International)

Say, [O Muhammad], “If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your relatives, wealth which you have obtained, commerce wherein you fear decline, and dwellings with which you are pleased are more beloved to you than Allah and His Messenger and jihad in His cause, then wait until Allah executes His command. And Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people.” (Sura 9:24, Sahih International)

To support the work of DCCI https://paypal.me/dcciministries0717

Find us on Twitter @DCCIministries and Facebook

Author: DCCI Ministries

Defend Christ Critique Islam (DCCI) Ministries seeks to preach the Gospel to Muslims using apologetics and polemics.

20 thoughts on “Why Jihadists attacked Strasbourg Christmas market”

  1. Allah purchased something that he made? You generally purchase something you do not have a right to. This concept is at odds with concepts in the Qur’an that suggests that Allah predestines the fate of the believers and non-believers. Sura 2:6-7 seems to say that the Islamic Dawah team is wasting its time. Sura 6:109 and Sura 6:149 seems to back up the idea that Dawah is a waste of time. Christians have a similar division among themselves but we are also required to live peacefully among our brothers in the Lord and the pagans. We don’t take revenge against disbelievers or those who have left the faith. This is one of the many reasons that your religion matters to over all societal harmony.

    1. “Danny Newton says: Allah purchased something that he made?”

      The concept is more rational than a worse double “inside trading”: Jesus purchases his body (church) with his defilement coming out of his body, i.e. blood.
      Monotheist barters himself and his properties for Paradise on the basis of Mutual consents: our consents and Allah’s consensual mercy (so not with a defilement).

      “You generally purchase something you do not have a right to.”

      It is more like a barter on Mutual consents.

      “This concept is at odds with concepts in the Qur’an that suggests that Allah predestines the fate of the believers and non-believers.”

      There are two sets of Predestination: good one and bad one. So, the older Predestination can run parallel with another written fate. It has been implied by the story of a boy whom Khidr kills for boy’s benefits.
      By killing him during his age of innocence, Khidr alters the *future sinful* life of the boy from the 1st (bad) Predestination to the 2nd (good) Predestination.

      “Sura 2:6-7 seems to say that the Islamic Dawah team is wasting its time. Sura 6:109 and Sura 6:149 seems to back up the idea that Dawah is a waste of time.”

      You cannot differentiate an infidel’s closed heart from a believer’s beneficial preaching.
      Just because certain Non-Moslems are unreformed in evilness, we Moslems would not stop a goodness thru our good gesture.

      “Christians have a similar division among themselves but we are also required to live peacefully among our brothers in the Lord and the pagans. We don’t take revenge against disbelievers or those who have left the faith. This is one of the many reasons that your religion matters to over all societal harmony.”

      Islam is a mix between religion (salvation) and state (politics, judgment, revenge). Apostasy is equal with a crime of sedition. Revenge is Biblical: Rom 13:4 “for he beareth not the sword in vain, a revenger to execute wrath”.

      1. [email protected] said:
        Islam is a mix between religion (salvation) and state (politics, judgment, revenge). Apostasy is equal with a crime of sedition. Revenge is Biblical: Rom 13:4 “for he beareth not the sword in vain, a revenger to execute wrath”.
        Romans 13.4 describes the right of worldly governments to execute laws justly. This is generally seen as an approval of capital punishment by the government with due process rights but, if you start out at the beginning of the chapter, the author, Paul, declares that the government is directed or even chosen by God. God can bring disaster to governments via overthrow by heathens or by any other means He wishes. Christians lived under hostile Roman leadership for years before the Romans decided to make it the state religion. Christians lived under hostile government in Europe and it resulted in persecuted groups moving away from their homes to new homes in other countries. Christians have earned contempt for their history of using the government to punish dissimilar religions for having beliefs that were not in line with the governing majority. Religion plus the power of the secular government is a toxic combination. The French, during their revolution, sought to bring the clergy under the power of France rather than the Pope. The Germans, in WWII, sought to bring the power of the church under the leadership of Hitler. Christians don’t need a concept of Jihad to engage in bad behavior. So this explains, at least partially, the anxiety over a religion like Islam becoming powerful in the midst of a non-Muslin population.

        1. “Danny Newton says: Romans 13.4 describes the right of worldly governments to execute laws justly.”

          So, now in Romans 13th the Law suddenly becomes sacred for Paul? A sign how he’s talking by his desire.
          Senate Law is Biblical?
          Emperor Law is Biblical?
          Silly.
          In the ancient Oriental beliefs there’s also a concept of “Heaven’s Mandate”. If a bloodthirsty tyrant is able to tame or conquer the forces of Nature, then it means the heavens give him a mandate for his claim of throne. Too easy to make the man-made laws so crooked.
          For us Moslems, the Shari’ah is the reason and reference for legitimising a Government, state and kingdom.

          “This is generally seen as an approval of capital punishment by the government with due process rights but, if you start out at the beginning of the chapter, the author, Paul, declares that the government is directed or even chosen by God.”

          So, the NT’s God chooses the killers for his kings.

          “God can bring disaster to governments via overthrow by heathens or by any other means He wishes.”

          No, the NT’s God is not vengeful anymore after he sent his son, right?

          “Christians lived under hostile Roman leadership for years before the Romans decided to make it the state religion.”

          Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?

          “Christians lived under hostile government in Europe and it resulted in persecuted groups moving away from their homes to new homes in other countries.”

          Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?

          “Christians have earned contempt for their history of using the government to punish dissimilar religions for having beliefs that were not in line with the governing majority.”

          Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?

          “Religion plus the power of the secular government is a toxic combination.”

          Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?

          “The French, during their revolution, sought to bring the clergy under the power of France rather than the Pope.”

          Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?

          “The Germans, in WWII, sought to bring the power of the church under the leadership of Hitler.”

          Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?

          “Christians don’t need a concept of Jihad to engage in bad behavior.”

          Now, when it comes to the Shari’ah you claim to come to your sense?

          “So this explains, at least partially, the anxiety over a religion like Islam becoming powerful in the midst of a non-Muslin population.”

          For us Moslems, the Shari’ah is the reason and reference for legitimising a Government, state and kingdom.

          1. [email protected] :Why do your NT’s Gods keep making mistakes in directing the kings?
            D. Newton: I don’t know and even if I had a lot of major clues, I could not put it together. I can’t even seem to vote for the right people even though I get a chance every two years.

            God has always suffered and permitted less than perfect government and less than perfect leaders. Ignoring the failure of self government in the Garden of Eden, there were judges that tried to govern(Chapter 8 of I Samuel) but they took bribes. The prophet Samuel warned them against appointing a king, Saul, but they wanted a king, despite the warnings. In the courts of kings of Israel were learned and holy men giving advise but there was also free will. The grand father of Bathsheba was an advisor to king David and he tried to sabotage David after the treachery that lead to the death of Uriah the Hittite. We should all tremble at the potential disaster concentrated government power has. Disaster can visit even the church if there is sin in the camp.

            If God made a mistake, I am not sure what it is or was. Free will is the universal solvent that vanquishes predestination. With free will, love is more genuine and more noble. Sorrow is more severe because if there is free will, there is true regret. If there is free will, there is true heroism, true love and true sacrifice. Jesus made a free will sacrifice to allow us a chance to enter into a durable and reliable relationship with God.

          2. [email protected]

            No, the NT’s God is not vengeful anymore after he sent his son, right?

            Danny Newton: God does not change. The thing that you should worry about is that God is just. If you have a choice between justice and mercy, take the mercy with gratitude.

      2. [email protected] says:
        20 December 2018 at 5:54 pm
        “Danny Newton says: Allah purchased something that he made?”

        The concept is more rational than a worse double “inside trading”: Jesus purchases his body (church) with his defilement coming out of his body, i.e. blood.
        Monotheist barters himself and his properties for Paradise on the basis of Mutual consents: our consents and Allah’s consensual mercy (so not with a defilement).

        “You generally purchase something you do not have a right to.”

        It is more like a barter on Mutual consents.

        Danny Newton: My problem is that I don’t have anything that God needs. It is like going to a store with empty pockets. In Western Law there is a concept that for a contract to be valid, one must offer similar consideration or value for an exchanged item or service. You can not make a binding legal contract for an illegal service and in you can not buy a bag of gold for a copper penny. What can you offer for your soul?

        1. “Danny Newton says: My problem is that I don’t have anything that God needs.”

          It is not what God needs. God just wants our consent for barter with His Paradise.

          “It is like going to a store with empty pockets.”

          If you don’t like God’s Paradise, you won’t barter your consent with it.

          ” In Western Law there is a concept that for a contract to be valid, one must offer similar consideration or value for an exchanged item or service.”

          That’s your consent.

          “You can not make a binding legal contract for an illegal service and in you can not buy a bag of gold for a copper penny.”

          For God, the golds or coins turn useless after bartering it with His Paradise.
          For God, our Consent is more expensive than gold. Perhaps our consent can be made further to make new investment of Paradise somewhere else.

          “What can you offer for your soul?”

          Our Consent.

  2. [email protected]:
    There are two sets of Predestination: good one and bad one. So, the older Predestination can run parallel with another written fate. It has been implied by the story of a boy whom Khidr kills for boy’s benefits.
    By killing him during his age of innocence, Khidr alters the *future sinful* life of the boy from the 1st (bad) Predestination to the 2nd (good) Predestination.
    Danny Newton:
    Speaking of killing children, There are a lot of Liberals who hope for the day that the Muslim will moderate their resistance to abortion based on the teaching that the fetus has no soul before the 120th day. Why not eliminate the clot before 120 days? The Progressive Left would hug your neck and call you enlightened. Can you see a day where someone would write a Fatwa clarifying this?

    1. “Danny Newton says: Speaking of killing children, There are a lot of Liberals who hope for the day that the Muslim will moderate their resistance to abortion based on the teaching that the fetus has no soul before the 120th day. Why not eliminate the clot before 120 days? The Progressive Left would hug your neck and call you enlightened. Can you see a day where someone would write a Fatwa clarifying this?”

      I hope someday the Msolems will encourage the Liberals this declare along with Animal Right activists: human fetus is a kind of living respectable animal, so it has the right to live and to be protected by its zookeeper, i.e. woman.

      1. Humans are conceived with DNA instructions for development and repair from conception to the rest of their lives. They are made in the image of God and therefore deserve respect. I don’t know when the soul enters the unborn but not knowing that seems to impose a duty to take only those actions lest likely to cause harm. This is especially true when you have no power to make the situation right if you make a mistake. Only God can make a life and give it a soul.

        1. That double standard marks the biggest Hypocrisy of the Modern Christians:
          – Christianity is in the same line with the Shari’ah Laws on so many social issues, such as Anti-abortion, but weirdly still the Christians prefer the infanticide Secular laws over the pro-life Shari’ah law.

          – Both Islam and Secularism equally oppose any intervention of the Biblical laws into the states, yet Christians show a prolonging “forgiving” tendency toward the Secularism, but Christians are so unforgiving toward Islam.

          – Christians blessed the Secular rulers as God’s appointed government, but they cannot bless our Shari’ah states as God’s appointed government. Hypocrisy.

          Suddenly, God of the Bible has no sovereignty whatsoever over our powerful Shari’ah. Bible’s God turns to be so weak and a false god when it comes to our Shari’ah.
          Bible’s God in Romans 13 has no jurisdiction on the more powerful Shari’ah.

    2. I can see why you might say that since the Hadith claims that Allah makes a house in Hell and a house in Paradise for everyone(paraphrase). But you seem to be redefining predestination so that it loses its Webster’s Dictionary meaning. So, if a Muslim kills a Muslim and alters the dead Muslims fate, would Allah punish the killer? Can the killer Muslim kill without the permission of Allah? How could the killer Muslim do anything against the will of Allah? If no one can act against the will of Allah, then does Allah deserve the blame for all of the evil deeds on Earth?

      1. Being killed (by ways of accident or intentionally) is a version of evil predestination which was written along with the good one during the time of one’s infancy around 40 days in the mother’s womb.

        Everything always happens under will of Allah, the ways can be various in every possibilities, but it becomes such a “canonised Fate” by going thru His Written Predestination, either good or “evil” (less good) one.

  3. We cannot accept the inconsistent arguments that when it comes to the hideous crimes committed by the Secular Law in the Secular states, Christians just consider their crimes as God’s mistakes.
    But when it comes to the Shari’ah Law in our Shari’ah states, suddenly Christians oppose it, even judge it as a non-God’s appointment.
    That’s so unfair.

    1. Doesn’t Muhammed say that one should be patient with their rulers(Amir) when they don’t agree with their actions?

      1. Civil War is permitted – as the last resort – among Moslems in order to stop injustice, per Q.49, v.9.
        Only if the rulers were given a trust thru law and consent (election), and he rules without violating Shari’ah.

        Mostly the unjust rulers were not chosen by people, but as puppets of foreign kingdom and outsiders.

        If your rulers are typical of crazy Caligula who demands your wife, mother and sisters and daughters for him to violate as precondition of political allegiance, there’s no obedience for that. If your rulers are typical of mad Hitler who demands you to kill Jewish children as precondition of allegiance, there’s no obedience for that. If your rulers are typical of zealous Nebuchadnezar who demands you to bow to Nebo as precondition of allegiance, there’s no obedience for that.

  4. In Sira, the Moslem scholars show a weak unsubstantial argument of the “changing of Qibla” due to Jewish animosity in February 624.
    In fact, the more stronger arguments show that actually three Jewish Tribes (Qaynuqa, Naders and Qurayza) remained neutral until the war of Badr took place in March 624. But, chronologically, “before” the Badr war, there already arose a sudden animosity and a very hostile rudeness from Madinah’s Hypocrites led by Ubayy Bin Salul.

    Later, the animosity of Jews was started only “after” the time of Badr Battle, it began when 2 Jewish chiefs secretly commit the First “desertion” by defecting to Mecca (even worse, by secretly making an oath in front Ka’bah to wage war against Moslems in Madinah).

    (i) First animosity by Ubayy:
    Wahidi, Asbab Nuzul, Quran 3:186.
    This was before the Battle of Badr. He passed by an assembly which included, among others, Abd Allah ibn Ubayy. This was before the latter had accepted Islam. This assembly included a mixture of Muslims, Jews and idolaters, the worshippers of idols. Abd Allah ibn Rawahah was also in this assembly. When the cloud of dust, stirred by the movement of the beat, reached the assembly, Abd Allah ibn Ubayy covered his nose with his cloak and said: Do not cover us with dust. The Messenger of Allah greeted them with the greeting of peace, stopped and climbed down his mount. He called them to Allah and recited to them some of the Qur’an. Then Abd Allah ibn Ubayy said: O man, there is nothing more beautiful than what you had just said. And if it is true, we ask you not to annoy us in these assemblies of ours. Go back to your camp, and if somebody comes to you, then relate it to him. Abd Allah ibn Rawahah then said: No, indeed, come and tell us about it in our own assemblies for we love it. The Muslims, idolaters and Jews then started to throw insults at each others until they were on the verge of assaulting one another. The Prophet kept calming them until they stopped.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd-Allah_ibn_Ubayy
    He occupied a high status in pre-Islamic Medinan society, and his supporters aimed for him to become “king”. The aim was not realized, however, because of the arrival of Muhammad in 622:[1][6] since the tribal conflict had not been completely resolved, some citizens looked towards another arbitrator and called in Muhammad, whose preaching had made him famous beyond his home town of Mecca.[5]
    The arrival of a man who claimed to speak in the name of God eclipsed Ibn Ubayy’s influence. That provoked his jealousy, which he was careful to conceal, but was mitigated by his moderation and peacefulness. Ibn Ubayy nonetheless remained a well-respected man.[5] According to Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Ubayy was “a man of great authority in Medina before the advent of the apostle” and “remained a continuing thorn in the flesh of his success”. [7]

    (2) The 1st Desertion (after Badr war) by Jews led by Ka‘b ibn Ashraf, Huyayy and 70 Jews:
    Wahidi, Asbab Nuzul, Quran 4:51-58.
    After the Battle of Uhud, Ka‘b ibn alAshraf went to Mecca, accompanied by seventy riders, in order to ally themselves with Quraysh against the Messenger of Allah, and break the covenant which they had with Allah’s Messenger. Ka‘b was the guest of Abu Sufyan while the other Jews were accommodated in the houses of Quraysh. The people of Mecca said: Your are people of Scripture and Muhammad has a Scripture and we are not completely sure that this is a scheme that you devised. So if you want us to go along with you, you have to prostrate to these two idols and believe in them, hence Allah’s saying (they believe in idols and false deities). Ka‘b then said to the people of Mecca: Let there be thirty of us and thirty of you; we shall all go to the Ka’bah and cling to it and promise the Lord of the House that we will do our bet to fight Muhammad. When they finished doing that, Abu Sufyan asked Ka‘b: You are a man who reads the Scripture and has knowledge while we are unlettered people who have no knowledge. Tell me: who is more guided in his way and closer to the truth, is it us or Muhammad? Ka‘b said: Tell me about your religion. Abu Sufyan said: We slaughter high-humped camels for the benefit of pilgrims, we give them water to drink, we welcome the guest, assist the wronged, keep our ties of kinship unsevered, populate the House of our Lord, circumambulate around it, and we are the inhabitants of the Sacred Precinct. Muhammad, on the other hand, is someone who has left the religion of his forefathers, severed his ties of kinship and went away from the Sacred Precinct. Moreover, our religion is ancient while his is new. Ka‘b said: By Allah, you are more guided in your way than he is. And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed (Hail thou not seen those unto whom a portion of the Scripture hath been given, how they believe in idols and false deities), meaning Ka‘b an his companions. (and he whom Allah hath cursed, thou (O Muhammad) wilt find for him no helper…) [4:52].
    Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Muqri’ informed us> Sufyan ibn Muhammad> Makki ibn Abdan> Abu’l- Azhar>
    Rawh> Sa‘id» Qatadah who said: This verse was revealed about Ka‘b ibn al-Ashraf and Huyayy ibn Akhtab, two Jews from Banu’l-Nadir, who met the people of Quraysh in the season of pilgrimage and were asked by the idolaters: Who is more guided to the way of the truth us or Muhammad? For we are the custodians of the Sacred Precinct, we provide water for the pilgrims and we are the inhabitants of the Sacred Precinct. They said: No indeed, you are more guided than Muhammad. They said this while knowing very well they were lying. And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed ( Those are they whom Allah hath cursed, and he whom Allah hath cursed, thou (O Muhammad) wilt find for him no helper). When they went back to their people, the latter told them: Muhammad claims that such-and-such was revealed about you. They said: He has said the truth. By Allah, the hatred and resentful envy that we have for him drove us to do so, (Lo! Allah commandeth you that ye restore deposits to their owners…) [4:58].

  5. According to Qur’an Q.2, v.142 the reason of changing the Qibla form Jerusalem to Mekkah has nothing to do with the Jews, in fact Qur’an says in Q.2, v.148 “each group has its Qibla” for justifying Jewish own Qibla, as much as Madina’s Charter acknowledges the plurality of faith.

    The changing of Qibla serves more internal purposes:
    -To identify Islam as the universal inclusive Faith of Abraham, far more inclusive than a closed tribal Judaism.
    -To acknowledge an universal feature of Christianity that has no Qibla, by stating that every direction is where the Face of God is, per Q.2, v.115.
    -To test the Faith of Moslems, and further internal consolidation or mobilization (after 1 year of caravan skirmishes) for facing a greater conflict with Mekkah’s pagans, per Q.2, v.143.
    -To

  6. The defecting (also conversion into paganism) of Jewish poet Ka‘b ibn Ashraf along with Huyayy and 70 Jews is a reason for the penalty on Ka’b:
    Abi Dawud Book 19, Hadith 2994
    Ka’ab bin Malik who was one of those whose repentance was accepted said: Ka’ab bin Al Ashraf used to satire the Prophet and incited the infidels of the Quraish against him. When the Prophet came to Madena, its people were intermixed, some of them were Muslims and others polytheists aho worshipped idols and some were Jews. They used to hurt the Prophet and his Companions. Then Allah Most High commanded His Prophet to show patience and forgiveness. So Allah revealed about them: And ye shall certainly hear much that will grieve you from those who receive Book before you. When Ka’ab bin Al Ashraf refused to desist from hurting the Prophet, the Prophet ordered Sa’d bin Mu’adh to send a band to kill him. He sent Muhammad bin Maslamah and mentioned the story of his murder. When they killed him, the Jews and the polytheist were frightened. Next day they came to the Prophet and said: Our Companions were attacked and night and killed. The Prophet informed them about that which he would say. The Prophet then called them so that he could write a deed of agreement between him and them and they should fulfill its provisions and desist from hurting him. He then wrote a deed of agreement between him and them and the Muslims in general.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *