Thursday, July 27, 2017


Several times I have recommended that y'all pay attention to the writings of Selwyn Duke, whom I have called the best, most clear-thinking conservative writer today. Why have you not done it?

Selwyn Duke's article (link:] WAS MOHAMMAD A 'TRUE MUSLIM'? was published on June 13th at the American Thinker website.
We're all familiar with the expression "What Would Jesus Do?" (WWJD) which some decades ago began appearing as a common guide by which people could measure their own behavior and impending decisions.
It made sense, because Jesus always did the correct thing; He always obeyed the Will of His Father, God. He couldn't have been "The Christ" otherwise.
What Would Jesus Do? Well, He would do exactly what He DID do. And He didn't ascend from here without first telling all of us what WE should do. Jesus said a great deal, but for the sake of brevity, I'll mention just what He Himself said was the foremost commandment that we ought to follow:
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. And the second, like it, is this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

It's a fact that in the history of mankind, some self-professed Christians have sinned. Some have murdered; some have stolen property; some have committed acts of sexual abuse against children (I'm looking mostly at you here, Catholic priests); some have entertained discriminatory, racist ideas. They've preached the dogma but haven't always lived the Christian life as well as they could and should have.
One thing we know about the self-professed Christian who enters into a business deal with you and then does something dishonest and underhanded and cheats you in that business dealing: He is behaving like a "bad" Christian. In fact, he's not following the foremost commandment of Christ and thus we could question whether he's really even a Christian at all.
I was born and raised in Los Angeles, and in my 30s, I moved to Phoenix where I lived for two decades. So, I have rubbed elbows with every type of person and known people of every ethnicity and religious belief. I have worked side-by-side with Muslims and gotten along with them perfectly well. However, it's because they were "bad" Muslims that we got along fine.
What I mean by "bad" is that they weren't doing what Muslims are supposed to do according to their religion. They weren't emulating as much as possible their "perfect" religious leader, Muhammad. I thank God for THAT!
I don't have a problem with individual Muslims, just so long as they're not "good" Muslims and following too closely what Islam teaches.
In an ironic twist, we see that asking oneself "What would Jesus do?" and then doing THAT makes a person a good Christian and a friend to mankind. But a Muslim asking himself "What would Muhammad do?" and then doing THAT, makes a person a good Muslim, which is very bad. However, a bad Muslim can be a good coworker, a good businessman, perhaps even a good friend to you.
This peculiar twist isn't so difficult to wrap one's mind around when you consider that Jesus also said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father [God] except through Me." This means that the other religious and spiritual paths are "fake views", and some of them were downright satanically devised. (I'm looking at you, Islam. And Theosophy. And 
Rosicrucianism. And A.C.I.M. And...)
To better understand my meaning when I say that a Muslim asking himself "What would Muhammad do?" and then doing it would make him a "good" Muslim but a "bad" person, I give you the aforementioned article, Was Muhammad A 'True Muslim'?, by Mr. Selwyn Duke:

In the wake of every terrorist act, there is the same argument. The voices-in-the-wilderness on the right will say, insofar as they’re not muzzled by hate-speech laws, that Islam is the problem. In contrast, a leftist drumbeat of media and mainstream politicos will assert that the Muslim terrorists aren’t really “Muslim” terrorists, that they’ve perverted the faith. As to the truth, it’s as with any other debate over a thing’s true meaning (e.g., the Constitution): it only makes sense to look for answers in original sources.

This brings us to a simple question: Was Mohammed a true Muslim?
It’s a rhetorical question, of course. As Islam’s founder — the religion was born of revelations he supposedly had in the early seventh century — Mohammed was the very first Muslim. Moreover, since Muslims view him as “The Perfect Man,” the ultimate role model, he’s not just the truest Muslim but the yardstick by which other Muslims may measure themselves.  
So what was Mohammed’s “perfection”? He was a warlord who launched approximately 30 military campaigns, many of which he led himself. He was a caravan raider (a bandit) and captured, traded in and owned slaves (by the way, will liberals suggest slave-owning Mohammed be diminished, as they’ve done with our founders?). He ordered massacres, used torture and had dissidents assassinated. In 627 AD, he beheaded more than 600 men and boys of the Qurayza tribe in Medina, Arabia, thus wiping it off the map. He also was a polygamist and made it lawful for masters to have sexual relations with their female captives.
So, clearly, if today’s Islamic jihadists aren’t true Muslims, neither was Mohammed. But since we know the Perfect Man was the truest of Muslims, then... well, you can finish the sentence.  
Yet when analyzing Muslim motivations, the influence of Mohammed’s character is generally subordinated to that of Islamic teachings (most of which come from Mohammed). And even here, people generally make the mistake of focusing only on the Koran, unaware that it’s a mere 16 percent of the Islamic canon. The majority of it comprises the Hadiths and Sira.
This is noteworthy because while 9 percent of the Koran is devoted to jihad and political violence, 21 percent of the Hadiths is and a whopping 67 percent of the Sira is devoted to it, according to Bill Warner, Director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. This is why Turkish journalist Uzay Bulut wrote in 2015 that “violence and domination” are “deeply rooted...and sanctioned with promises of rewards” in Islam, and, consequently, “fundamentalists will always find people to excite and people to persecute.”
The distribution of violent injunctions in these books helps explain something else. A German study involving 45,000 teens found that while increasing religiosity made Christian youth less violent, increasing religiosity made Muslim youth more violent.
This makes sense. A nominal Catholic may know a few verses from the Bible, but only a devout one scours it and, in addition, will read his catechism. Likewise, a casual Muslim might know a little bit from the Koran.
A serious one will soak it all in and delve into the Hadiths and Sira as well — and be exposed to all the violent injunctions therein.
Even more to the point here, however, these two sets of works together comprise the majority of the Sunnah, which is, as explains, “The legal way or ways, orders, acts of worship and statements of the Prophet, that are ideals and models to be followed by Muslims” (emphasis added). It is all about Mohammed’s words and deeds.
The significance of this cannot be overemphasized. Virtues (and vices) are caught more than they’re taught; actions speak louder than words. Thus are Christians more likely to ask “What would Jesus do?” than “What does the Bible say?” Thus are they more likely to counsel “Reflect Christ” than “Reflect Matthew 22:37.” Oh, the Bible is wonderful, and Matthew 22:37 is one of its most memorable parts. But examples are more powerful than instructions.
Muslims’ role model, their “Perfect Man,” is very different from Jesus in type of influence but not in degree of influence. As Warner points out, “The Koran says 91 different times that Mohammed's is the perfect pattern of life. It is much more important to know Mohammed than the Koran.” Thus is “Mohammed” (and its spelling variants) the world’s most common male name, belonging to approximately 150 million men and boys. And there’s a reason why pious Muslims write “PBUH” (“Peace be unto him”) after his name and why they’ll riot if he’s portrayed in a cartoon. He is, in a sense, the human face of Allah. makes this clear, writing that “when Allaah says: ‘Whosoever obeys the Messenger [Mohammed], has indeed obeyed Allaah’ (Surah An-Nisa 4:80), it should be clear that one has obeyed Allaah by obeying the Messenger.”
Islaamnet also informs that Allah commanded, “‘It is not fitting for a believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decreed by Allah and His Messenger to have any choice in the matter. If anyone disobeys Allah and His Messenger he is clearly astray’ (Surah Al-Ahzab 33:36).”
This Messenger is, again, that warlord, bandit, mass murderer, employer of torture, polygamist and slave trader and master. Worse still, it’s not that Muslims always rationalize away or attempt to whitewash this history. The truly devout ones may consider these actions — when directed toward non-Muslims — to be “good” because the actions have been sanctioned by their perceived author of right and wrong, Allah, and his messenger.
So people sometimes talk about “reforming” Islam, but this would require reforming Mohammed himself. How? You cannot resurrect him and have him live his life over.
Among the founders of extant major or quasi-major religions/philosophical systems — Lao Tzu, Confucius, Buddha, etc. — Mohammed stands alone, being a tyrant-cum-teacher. Of course, he doesn’t stand alone in history; Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane and many others paved similar bloody paths. As with them, he was largely a man of his time and place. But to more than a billion people, he’s also the perfect man even in our time and place.
And that’s the point. After all, if someone told you Attila the Hun was the perfect man and his role model, would you turn your back on that person?

In closing, below is an amusing video for you to watch.
{*My thanks to Julio down by the Trainyard 
for Crowder and for the initials WWMD*}

~ Stephen T. McCarthy


  1. Sixgun McItchyfingerJuly 27, 2017 at 10:17 PM

    That was an AWESOME blog bit! It was so good that I read it aloud to my wife. Your setup was very well-written and it flowed naturally off the tongue as I read aloud. Actually, reading something out loud is often how I'll gauge whether something is well-written. If a piece isn't, it becomes readily apparent as one stumbles and trips over awkward phrases.

    You said:
    "Several times I have recommended that y'all pay attention to the writings of Selwyn Duke, whom I have called the best, most clear-thinking conservative writer today. Why have you not done it?"

    I can tell you EXACTLY why I have not done it (much): I can only stomach so much of "this world's" issues. We are bludgeoned with conflict daily, and - though Duke is fabulous - reading arguments like this (that I already know, though not as artfully constructed in my own mind) just drags my spirits down.

    "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind..."

    I'm pretty tired of the stuffs of "this world." I try for: "Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee:..." I'm still tryin' pretty unsuccessfully.

    Thanks, Brother.

    1. And that was an AWESOME comment! Thank you, Sixgun McItchyfinger.

      It's interesting what you said about reading the blog bit aloud, because many years ago I took a screenwriting class in which the teacher said the best way to see if the dialogue you've written seems natural is to read it back to yourself aloud.

      I did that a few times when I wasn't already convinced. But for the most part, I always felt I had a good ear for natural dialogue. In fact, in writing fiction, I felt it was my strongest suit.

      I totally get what you're saying about not focusing the mind too much on "this world". Back before I had a computer, my mind was about 100% directed toward my reAlationship with God, and I was in a state of praying "without ceasing" (as Saint Paul spoke of).

      But since getting plugged into "this world" via the Internet, I've been feeling more like I want to do [Link:) ​THIS!

      ~ D-FensDogG
      Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

  2. Stephen,
    My cousin studied Islam and Christianity for one of his two masters degrees. He reported that Islams version of the book of Revelation has their Jesus is the Christian false prophet, the Mahdi is the Christian antichrist (which is there savior), and Christs second coming is their version of the antichrist.

    The lies are going to get very very good in the days ahead. Great blog bit.

    1. Thanks, BR'ER!

      Yes, sir, as The Bible warns us, the deception will be great, and but for the grace of God, even the "elect" would be deceived.

      Crash helmet on? Buckle up, Brother -- it's going to be a bumpy ride. And I believe the last mile is just around the bend.

      ~ D-FensDogG
      (link:] Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

  3. This is an important post and as with so many posts that more people should be reading and thinking about, few are. So sad--and frighteningly disturbing. Most non-Muslim people don't know much of anything about Islam and are easily susceptible to the Islamist propaganda which is so widely accepted and disseminated by the media. A pack of lies casually accepted as deep truths.

    I get so annoyed when I hear self-proclaimed Christians stating that Islam is a noble religion with deep respectable roots in history. Hogwash! (and I emphasize the hog). Apologists for Islam make me want to gag on my bacon.

    Islam is a false evil political ideology masquerading in the guise of a religion. Most people don't accept that because few people will investigate on their own and just accept what they are delivered by the media. It's scary, but a lot in mainstream thinking is pretty scary.

    A book that I recommend is Did Muhammad Exist? by Robert Spencer--very interesting stuff. I started investigating Islam in 1980 after the Iranian hostage situation took place and have been a student of the subject ever since. I wholeheartedly reject and condemn Islam and the world would be a better place if they did the same. Of course that day will come, but maybe not on the terms that a lot of people are going to like.

    Keep up the fight. Maybe someday we can have a giant "Why Islam Sucks" blogfest. Yeah, I can see that happening--not!

    Arlee Bird
    Tossing It Out

    1. Thanks, LEE!

      I have not read that book, but I HAVE heard it mentioned more than a few times. And I have read 'THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO ISLAM (AND THE CRUSADES)' by the very same author, Robert Spencer.

      I would be interested in reading 'DID MUHAMMAD EXIST' and might well do that in the not too distant future.

      Well, you know me, Brother -- I'm the same as I ever was (but without the blog following now). I still stand on the idea that almost all "Common Knowledge" is wrong, and objective research will prove that out.

      Mark Twain wrote: "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect". Me, I'm a little less charitable. I say: There is a reason the word "asses" can be found in the word "masses".

      Over at my STMcC REVIEWS... blog I am now in the midst of posting a series of reviews pertaining to Abortion. Not long after that, I will be regularly posting old negative reviews about Feminism.

      Hmmm.... I still can't figure out why my blogs aren't much more popular than they are. "I should be 50 points ahead!"

      ~ D-FensDogG
      [Link:) Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...


All submitted comments that do not transgress "Ye Olde Comment Policy" will be posted and responded to as soon as possible. Thanks for taking the time to comment.