Did You Know That Islam and Muslims Built America?


by Pastor Anonymous


Pastor Anonymous is a missionary to the Muslim community in the USA. It is not the custom of the Editor of ARPTalk to withhold the name of the author of an article; however, in this case and for obvious reasons, the name of the author has been withheld. The Editor makes the following video available for readers of ARPTalk:

and this World Magazine link (click here)

The commentator on the video is not a Christian; however, the information that he provides is very useful in understanding Islam. He hits the three main issues about which the reader needs to be aware.

A recent poll shows that 20% of Americans believe that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim. It’s no wonder when it seems that he goes out of his way to find ways to praise Islam and Muslims. On August 14, Obama hosted an iftar dinner (fast-breaking meal at sunset) at the White House in honor of the first day of the Muslim’s month of Ramadan. In his speech, as usual, he praised Islam and told of how important and integral Islam really was to the founding and development of our nation. Furthermore, he stated, “The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan – making it the first known iftar at the White House more than 200 years ago.” So you see according to Obama our founding Fathers were very politically correct and religiously tolerant, so much so as to hold a Muslim fast-breaking iftar for a Muslim dignitary 200 years ago. This rhetoric is not new, as those who were listening heard it a few years ago with the first Muslim to be elected to the US Congress, Keith Ellison, who also pointed to Thomas Jefferson as being religiously tolerant and very favorable towards and even seeking Truth in Islam.

While this pro-Islamic rhetoric proliferates in almost every realm of American society (including dedicated efforts to whitewash Islam in our public schools) there is a strange mix of general acceptance along with a sneaking suspicion among much of America. The number one problem that Americans have in trying to respond to Islam’s growth here is no different than that which has plagued our government since its inception, namely ignorance. Interestingly enough, both liberals and Muslims (strange bedfellows, I might add) would be quick to agree, saying that we Americans are just acting out of ignorance towards Islam. I wholeheartedly agree! The question is “Who is ignorant? Who is deceived? And what is the true nature of the Islamic Religion?

It is easy for others to blame Americans or even for us to excuse ourselves since we have been, since our inception, an overwhelmingly Christian Nation and have only begun to have interaction with Muslims in the last 25 years or so in this country. The liberals tell us that we are so closed minded and proud that we do not care about anyone else. However, the liberals I’ve heard are truly deceived when it comes to the true nature of Islam. Why is it that so few in the West seem to have a good understanding of what Islam really teaches, what Muslims really believe, and how they view Christians in particular and Westerners in general? Would you believe that a big part of the answer lies within the teachings of Islam itself? The problem is that so many Americans no longer seem interested in facts or the Truth and say along with Pilate, “What is Truth?” The Truth about Islam is readily available in the Qur’an, the Hadith (revered Muslim traditions of Muhammad), Muslim biographies of Muhammad and Muslim commentaries. However, who has the time or the willingness to take the time to learn the Truth? Instead, most Americans get their knowledge of Islam from what they hear on the news, from the Media and even from our politicians.

Now I invite you to accompany me as we gain a few candid insights into the true nature of Islam via this one instance of pro-Islamic misinformation and propaganda. Remember, Obama has told us and the world repeatedly that Islam has always been a big part of America. He points to Thomas Jefferson’s joining in a Muslim religious ceremony 200 years ago as evidence that our government has always celebrated Islam, respected its beliefs and honored its adherents. Let’s take a brief journey back in history following our President’s assertions to see if they are accurate.

Keith Ellison is a US Congressman who professes Islam and wears it on his sleeve like a badge. In 2007 when he was sworn in by none other than Nancy Pelosi, he did not take the oath of office on the Bible, but on the Qur’an. And it wasn’t just any Qur’an that was used, but a two volume set out of the personal library of Thomas Jefferson. Let us look at the words of Rep. Ellison.

Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert said, “Keith is paying respect not only to the founding fathers’ belief in religious freedom but the Constitution itself.” Ellison, who was originally told about the Qur’an from an anonymous letter, spoke to the Associated Press in a phone interview. He said that using Jefferson’s Qur’an makes a point, “It demonstrates that from the very beginning of our country, we had people who were visionary, who were religiously tolerant, who believed that knowledge and wisdom could be gleaned from any number of sources, including the Qur’an. A visionary like Thomas Jefferson was not afraid of a different belief system,” Ellison said. “This just shows that religious tolerance is the bedrock of our country, and religious differences are nothing to be afraid of [author’s emphasis].

Proverbs 18:17 says that “The first to plead his case seems just, until another comes and examines him” (NASB).

Now let us take a look at the real reason for Thomas Jefferson’s interest in Islam and hosting a Muslim dignitary at the White House some 200 years ago. Here is a story from the American Thinker:

January 04, 2007

Jefferson’s Koran

Thomas Lifson

Curt at Flopping Aces highlights the very interesting history behind Thomas Jefferson’s interest in the Koran, as published by the National Review in 2005.

Thomas Jefferson once questioned Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain about the continuing piracy of the United States ships to which he told the future President that it was their duty as good Muslims to take the war to the unbeliever:

Take, for example, the 1786 meeting in London of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain. As American ambassadors to France and Britain respectively, Jefferson and Adams met with Ambassador Adja to negotiate a peace treaty and protect the United States from the threat of Barbary piracy.

These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [sic] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise” [author’s emphasis].

This is what Jefferson learned of Islam from his interaction with Muslims. But liberals and Muslims will object that even if this historically accurate, it is a representation of corrupt Muslim leaders in a particular point of history and not an accurate representation of the beautiful religion of Islam. Muslims and liberals seem to have at least one thing in common, an apparent readiness to let the truth fall to the wayside in order to promote and achieve their goals.

The candor of that Tripolitan ambassador is admirable in its way, but it certainly foreshadows the equally forthright declarations of, say, the Shiite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1980s and the Sunni Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, not to mention the many pronouncements of their various minions, admirers, and followers. Note that America’s Barbary experience took place well before colonialism entered the lands of Islam, before there were any oil interests dragging the U.S. into the fray, and long before the founding of the state of Israel (reference).

How many of you realize that America’s first war as an organized nation was with Muslim terrorists that had the very same creed and belief 200 years ago as they do today. Notice the quote of the Muslim ambassador before as to why the Muslim Nations were attacking the US (long before anyone knew or cared about political correctness):

Recently, I was taking live calls on the air on my TV show investigating Islam from a Christian perspective. A young Muslim caller said that I was a hate filled racist and needed to study the Qur’an and Hadith to really know Islam. So, I immediately took her to the Qur’an Chapter 4.34, which instructs husbands to beat their unruly wives. When I asked her if she agreed with this passage from her own Qur’an, she said, “You’re an airhead,” and hung up the phone. Muslims have been hiding too long behind their scriptures, which are virtually unknown to Americans. While the Qur’an is widely available in English (over 15 different English Translations are available) Muslims are quick to hide behind the original Arabic whenever we come to a passage that sounds violent or backward, hateful or murderous. Anytime an American brings up a verse that clearly seems to prove Islam violent or in someway out of sync with Western views, the Muslim loves to respond, “You don’t understand the Arabic!” If the truth is known, they probably don’t understand the Arabic either, as only 18% of the 1.5 billion Muslims are Arabic speakers and the Arabic of the Qur’an is almost 1400 years old.

I do read Arabic, and I am able to go back to it and see the true meaning of the passage in its original language. And let me tell you that the translations of the Qur’an are themselves an apologetic tool in whitewashing those passages that reveal the true nature of Islam. There is a great deal of deception in the various English translations of the Qur’an, and this is evidenced by the variance of translations becoming the greatest when we encounter difficult passages for Western ears. Many examples could be given, but just a couple will have to suffice here.

Compare these two English translations of the same passage from Sura (chapter in the Qur’an) 4:34 on how to discipline unruly wives.

… If you experience rebellion from women, and they stand up against you, apprise them of possible consequences. Next, leave them in their resting places apart from you. And keep admonishing them with examples that they stop rebelling [author’s emphasis]. If they pay heed to you, seek not a way against them. Allah is Most High, Great. (Shabbir Ahmed)

… and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them [author’s emphasis]; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (M.H. Shakir)

Notice how the second translation commands husbands to beat their wives while the first translation mentions nothing about beating anyone? The second translation rightly translates the Arabic second person plural imperative verb “aouthrabahunna” as “beat them” while the first is sheer deception.

Now let’s take a look at one more instance of this clear subterfuge found in two English translations of Sura 8 verse 12:

This is how your Lord inspired the angels, “I am with you. So make the believers stand firm. I will cast terror in the hearts of the rejecters of the Truth. Launch a swift hard strike to disillusion their command and scatter the soldiers [author’s emphasis]. (Shabbir Ahmed)

When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them [author’s emphasis]. (M. H. Shakir)

Once again, if you know the Arabic, you will find that the second translation is accurate while the first is a whitewashing. For anyone who doubts my assertion should go to the following Muslim-produced web site and check it out yourself.

Notice that both translations of the Sura 8.12 do agree on one point, and that is that the Allah of the Qur’an will “cast terror in the hearts of” the unbelievers. Now that we are back to the subject of terror and terrorism, let’s take a look at how the Qur’an matches up with Obama’s and Ellison’s ROSY picture of this peaceful and tolerant religion. Remember the quote from a Muslim diplomat when asked by Madison and Jefferson of the reason they were going to war:

Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [sic] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise [author’s emphasis]. ”

Here is what the Qur’an says on the matter in 9:5 and 29:

And so, when the sacred months are over, slay those [author’s emphasis] who ascribe divinity to aught beside God wherever you may come upon them, and take them captive [author’s emphasis], and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place! Yet if they repent, and take to prayer, and render the purifying dues, let them go their way: for, behold, God is much forgiving, a dispenser of grace.

Fight those [author’s emphasis] who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection [author’s emphasis].

And now a famous Hadith concerning the matter:

Sahih Al-Bukhari

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24: Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

Allah’s Apostle [Muhammad] said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle [author’s emphasis], and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.”

Notice the concept of enslavement and ransom in the next verse from the Qur’an. Also, the next several verses and the final Hadith prove that assurance of salvation comes from martyrdom while fighting jihad against the unbelievers.


So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom [author’s emphasis] (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish [author’s emphasis].


And what though ye be slain in Allah’s way or die therein? Surely pardon from Allah and mercy are better than all that they amass.


What though ye be slain or die, when unto Allah ye are gathered?


Think not of those, who are slain in the way of Allah, as dead. Nay, they are living. With their Lord they have provision [author’s emphasis].


Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other [author’s emphasis]. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.


Indeed Allah has purchased from the believers their persons and their wealth and in return has promised them paradise; they fight in the cause of Allah and slay and are slain [author’s emphasis].

And a famous Hadith on the subject states:

1067 Al-Tirmidhi

Narrated Al-Miqdam ibn Ma’dikarib, Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] (peace be upon him) said,

“The martyr receives six good things from Allah: he is forgiven at the first shedding of his blood; he is shown his abode in Paradise; he is preserved from the punishment in the grave; he is kept safe from the greatest terror [author’s emphasis]; he has placed on his head the crown of honour, a ruby of which is better than the world and what it contains; he is married to seventy-two wives of the maidens with large dark eyes; and is made intercessor for seventy of his relatives.” Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah transmitted it.

So then, what do the original teachings of Islam say concerning the matter? Islam demands that its adherents fight and kill all non-Muslims unless they convert or become servants or slaves. Islam is the original religion of terror and the Allah of Islam will use terror against the Muslims’ enemies. Muslims are commanded to behead the unbelievers and cut off their fingertips. Muslims are guaranteed salvation by being killed as they try to mutilate and kill the unbelievers fighting their holy Jihad for the sake of Islam.

How curious it is to see that the very propaganda used by Obama, Ellison and other Muslims in the public eye in the US is a complete farce actually belying the true nature of Islam, which is entirely different than what they would have us believe.

Islam has been at war with the entire non-Muslim world since it very inception. Islam is still at war with us and singles out Christians and Jews as their main enemies. Over the 1400 years of Islam’s existence, this war has been fought in a variety of ways and in various theatres all over the world. What Muslims almost did in 732 AD at the Battle of Tours (conquer all of Christian Western Europe), they are now doing in a very different, more subtle, yet more successful way. Islam is taking over Western Europe by biological multiplication alone. The Muslim birthrate now outstrips the native European rate by four to one!

In America the Muslim Jihad is being fought through the culture with words and litigation. Muslims pride themselves on using the very freedoms and rights that brought them here to attempt to take away those rights from everyone else by replacing our Constitution with Sharia (Islamic) Law. Notice the following words by Omar M. Ahmad, former chairman of the board of the Council on American-Islamic relations (an Islamic lobbyist group in America): “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth” (Lisa Gardiner, San Ramon Valley Herald, “American Muslim leader urges faithful to spread Islam’s message,” July 4, 1998).

If this is what the public relations side of Islam is saying, what do you think the not-so-public fundamentalists are saying out of the public eye?

What a sad and dangerous time we live in, when our very own President is, wittingly or not, leading the charge for Muslim advancement and empowerment in the US and even the World and using our tax dollars to do it!

May we humbly seek our Lord so that He might be pleased to send revival once again to this great country! For without revival, the spirit of anti-Christ will continue to reign.

This is Islam, an anti-Christ, and remember, brethren, that means anti-you and anti-me and anti-American! We face no greater declared enemy.

“And who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son” (1 Jn. 2:22, KJV).

God help us!

Share This:
Facebook Twitter Email Plusone Linkedin Pintrest

Filed Under: Newsletter


RSSComments (7)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Bill Crenshaw says:

    Chuck — I got excited when I started reading the first article in this issue. Common ground, I thought! Chuck and I are going to be in agreement about the appalling state of ignorance in the US as evinced by the ludicrous tea party ideas about Obama being a Muslim and all the other baseless claptrap that passes for news or truth these days!

    Didn’t take you long to disabuse me of that idea. And to contradict your previous email that told me I was barking up the wrong theonomic tree if I thought that Christian Reconstructionism had any tendrils in the ARPC.

    Chuck, your theocratic slip is showing. And what is most disturbing about theonomy, Christian Reconstructionism, Seven Mountains, Dominionism, etc, etc, etc, is that each iteration of this theocratic impulse is so profoundly not just un-American, but anti-American. The kind of United States they envision is not what the Constitution embodies.

    But all is not lost! We do agree on one thing in this issue of ARPT. As you have no doubt already noticed and as this comment illustrates, I do take your opening quotation to heart and try to act on it:

    “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
    -Dietrich Bonhoeffer

  2. Ralph Smith says:

    Dear William Crenshaw,
    I’m not at all sure that you could define ‘theonomic’ ‘dominionism’ if you had a theological dictionary written in Erskinese! It is my recommendation that you contact ex-Erskine President (AKA the current Erskine Seminary President)Rev. Gaston for theological advice on how to fool ARPs into re-defining theological positions. Rev. Gaston and Erskine seminary have effectively convinced the ARP world that Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote created evangelical doctrine.

  3. Chuck Wilson says:


    Sorry to disappoint you, but I am NOT the author of this article. For obvious reasons, I am protecting the author’s identify. You may address the author in your posts. He is a reader of ARPTalk. He may respond to your post; however, I am not going to allow him to reveal his identify on ARPTalk. If you ask and give your e-mail address, he may respond directly to you. The author is not someone that you know.

    By the way, what is “Seven Mountains”? I don’t know!

    Did you click on the video site? As far as I know, the commentator is NOT a Christian of any stripe.

    Have you read Eric Metaxas’ biography, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy? I recommend it. Metaxas has also written a biography on Wilberforce. That biography on Wilberforce was the basis for the recent movie.

    I’m curious as to why you find Bonhoeffer’s quote so compelling. I would think that you would disagree with Bonhoeffer’s view of God.


  4. Mark Wright says:

    Great quote by Bonhoeffer.

    I would be interested in knowing Dr. Crenshaw’s definition of evil. A definition of sin as well.

    Mark W

  5. Brian Smith says:

    Erskine’s lawsuit (ahhhem…VP Gaston’s professor and friends) against your denomination has been dropped. Is this a good thing or a bad thing for Erskine and for the Presbyterianism? Does this mean that you are done fighting against EC?

    Also, how can you and other ARP ministers allow your seminary to go against believing in the Bible’s authority. My pastor said that Erskine used to believe in the Bible when men like Dr. Meltin and Dr. Blumenstein used teach there. I know Dr. Gore believes in the Bible he spoke a few times in chapel and did a Bible study once when I was at EC.

    Just asking my questions!

  6. Chuck Wilson says:


    Once again, thank you for your inquiries. I will attempt to answer your questions as you have asked them.

    First question: “Erskine’s lawsuit (ahhhem…VP Gaston’s professor and friends) against your denomination has been dropped. Is this a good thing or a bad thing for Erskine and for the Presbyterianism?”

    First answer: This has three parts. (1) Your assumption that ETS Executive Vice President Neely Gaston was one of the masterminds behind the lawsuits against the ARP Church, in my opinion, is correct. (2) Whether the dropping of the lawsuit by Chesnut (the Alumni Association), Taylor, and Young is a good thing or bad thing is unclear. What is clear is this: the plaintiffs, Chesnut (the Alumni Association), Taylor, and Young, dropped the lawsuit and settled with the ARP Church on the terms of the Patrick-Wingate Compromise that was adopted by General Synod in June. That is, Chesnut (the Alumni Association), Taylor, and Young accepted the terms of the ARP Church. I was shocked that the plaintiffs were willing to drop their lawsuit. Personally, I wanted a ruling from the court of appeals. My opinion is that the attorneys of the plaintiffs got wind that the lawsuit was going to go against their clients and they advised them to settle. If that isn’t the case, then why did they settle at this point in time? They sure didn’t settle because they are nice, sweet people who love Jesus and the ARP Church! I suspect we will never know all the reasons for the settlement by the plaintiffs; they are not going to be forthright. Unfortunately, without a ruling from the court, the way for another lawsuit in the future is open. (3) What does all this mean for “Presbyterianism”? I’m not sure what you mean by “Presbyterianism”. “Presbyterianism is much larger than the ARP Church. If you will define the term a bit, I will attempt to give you an answer.

    Second question: “Does this mean that you are done fighting against EC?”

    Second answer: My answer has two parts: (1) You have noticed that this issue of ARPTalk is different. Erskine is not the only thing that ARPs are concerned about or think about. In the past, issues of ARPTalk have dealt with the broader life of the ARP Church. (2) The idea that I am fighting “against” Erskine is incorrect. I am contending FOR Erskine. No, I haven’t given up.

    Third question: “[H]ow can you and other ARP ministers allow your seminary to go against believing in the Bible’s authority [?]”

    Third answer: What a mean, unkind, vile and yet correct and insightful question you have asked! I can only answer for myself: I don’t know how to protest more loudly that what I do. I have asked your question of my brothers in the ARP Church. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act. The judgment of God is upon us for our unfaithfulness regarding both EC and ETS! We have countenanced evil and called it good. The ARP Church is not prospering and will not prosper so long as we halt on this question. The same is to be said of EC and ETS.

    Now, may I ask you a question? You are blunt and forthright. Did you read Bill Crenshaw’s post regarding this issue of ARPTalk? What is your opinion of Bill Crenshaw?


  7. Brian Smith says:


    I like Dr. Crenshaw. I liked all my EC professors for the most part. When I was at EC, I did spend much time debating and dare I say studying beyond the basic requirements for my classes. Dr. C just doesn’t like conversations about faith unless its a critical look at it. He definitely makes you think outside the box. Why he would want to stay at EC instead of going to a public college or somthing is beyond me. My guess, is that Dr. C has little respect for the ARP because he knows how little respect the ARP has for EC. FWIW

    thanks for the answers to my questions. BTW, my questions for you come from several folks affiliated with EC–but who are afraid to post them.