March 2, 2017
Caliph Umar fought alongside of Mohammed in nearly all his battles. Umar’s daughter Hafsa was one of Mohammed’s wives. Waging jihad, Umar conquered enormous areas, including:
- parts of Persia,
- North Africa,
- Damascus, and
The world’s oldest library was in Alexandria, Egypt. Persian traveler, Abd-Al-Latif Al Baghdadi and Syrian prelate Bar Hebraeus related when Caliph Umar invaded in 641 AD, he told his commander Amr bin al-Ass:
Touching the books you mention, if what is written in them agrees with the Qur’an, they are not required; if it disagrees, they are not desired. Destroy them therefore.
The account continues that the library books were burned to heat the city’s bath-houses for six months. Libraries in Babylon, Syria, and Greece met similar fates.
This is reflected in current reports, such as Breitbart News, April 13, 2016:
ISIS militants also raided the Central Library of Mosul to destroy all non-Islamic books.
‘These books promote infidelity and call for disobeying Allah,’ announced a militant to the residents. ‘So they will be burned.’
When the Islamic conquest cut off the supply of papyrus reeds used for paper in Europe, there was a decline of literacy, beginning of the Dark Ages.
In Egypt, Muslim Caliphs instituted government commissions to seek out the Pharaohs’ tombs for plundering.
This effort to erase Egyptian history was so thorough that in a few generations, Egyptians had no memory of who built the Great Pyramids.
This is similar to the modern day jihad destruction of:
- Buddhist statues in Afghanistan;
- Assyrian Museum;
- the Prophet Jonah’s grave in Nineveh (Mosul, Iraq);
- Ayotollah Khomeini’s attempt to destroy Cyrus’ ancient Persian palace at Persepolis;
- Egyptian rioters trashing mummies;
- Ancient Syrian and Chaldean churches dating back to the time of the Apostles were blown up.
Mohammed had stated:
Do not leave an image without obliterating it, or a high grave without leveling it. (Hadith Sahih Muslim, 2115)
As the “rightly guided” Muslim Caliphs conquered North Africa and the Middle East, it interrupted Mediterranean trade, economically devastating Rome and Byzantium.
In 846 AD, just 46 years after Charlemagne was crowned Holy Roman Emperor in Rome’s old St. Peter’s basilica, 11,000 Muslim attacked.
They sacked Rome, looted old St. Peter’s basilica and St. Paul Outside the Wall Church, desecrating the graves of both St. Peter and St. Paul.
As a result, Pope Leo IV began building the wall around the Vatican.
In 849 AD, Muslim Saracen raiders set sail from Sardina with a fleet to invade Rome.
Pope Leo rallied the cities of Amalfi, Gaeta, and Naples to send ships to block the mouth of the Tiber River near Ostia. Muslims attacked and the fighting was fierce, when suddenly a violent storm arose, dividing the Christian fleet from the Muslim attackers.
The Christian ships were able to make it back to port and weather the storm, but the Muslim ships were severely damaged and scattered. When the storm subsided, the remaining Muslim ships were easily captured.
In 1400s, as Muslims invaded Constantinople, Byzantium, and Greece, they destroyed churches, libraries, schools, museums, graves, and artwork.
Greek scholars fled west to Florence, Italy, reintroducing their Greek art, architecture, and philosophy to western Europe.
This is called “The Renaissance.”
President Obama referred to this while giving a speech in Egypt, June 4, 2009:
It was Islam … paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), considered the Father of the French Revolution, owned a dog named “Sultan.” He wrote in Discourse on the Arts and Sciences (1750, translated by Ian Johnston):
Europe had fallen back into the barbarity … A revolution was necessary to bring men back to common sense, and it finally came from a quarter where one would least expect it. It was the stupid Muslim, the eternal blight on learning, who brought about its rebirth among us.
The collapse of the throne of Constantine carried into Italy the debris of ancient Greece. France, in its turn, was enriched by these precious remnants. The sciences soon followed letters. To the art of writing was joined the art of thinking.
In retrospect, Islam was instrumental in bringing about “The Dark Ages” when they conquered Egypt, cut off trade across the Mediterranean, and held back the ships of papyrus; and Islam was instrumental in “The Renaissance” when they invaded Greece and destroyed Greek culture, causing scholars to flee to Italy.
In fact, the very concepts of “Europe” and “Christendom” took shape in response to the Islamic invasion, as previously Europe viewed itself as innumerable independent kingdoms.
This was similar to the 13 American colonies having to work together against the King of England, giving birth to the concept of the “united” States.
As the Greek culture was devastated, scholars also carried to the west their Greek New Testaments and ancient Biblical manuscripts.
Soon, western European scholars, like Erasmus—a friend of Martin Luther—began translating the Bible not just from Latin, but
This renewed interest in the original language and meaning of words in the Greek New Testament laid the foundation for “The Reformation.”
In 1517, Martin Luther began the Reformation by posting Ninety-Five Theses, or debate questions, on the Wittenberg Church door in Saxony, Germany.
Different German kings became Lutheran or “Reformed Christian” and broke away from the Catholic Holy Roman Empire.In 1529, a hundred thousand Ottoman Muslim warriors surrounded Vienna, Austria, under the command of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent. He sent suicide bombers at the gates and had miners tunnel under the walls.
Miraculously, Vienna was saved by torrential freezing rain which fell for weeks, resulting in sickness among Suleiman’s troops. He abandoned the attack and left, but not before beheading 4,000 Christian hostages.
Suleiman attempted to attack Vienna again in 1532, but was turned back.
In 1534, Suleiman led his Ottoman Turkish Sunni Muslims to conquer the Shi’a Muslims of Persia (Iran).
He annexed most of the Middle East and huge areas of North Africa, including the Barbary States of Tripoli, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco.
Catholic Spain used the gold from the New World to finance the defense of Europe against the Ottoman invasion. Holy Roman Emperor Charles V of Spain, fought Suleiman’s ships which attacked the southern coasts of Europe.
In 1535, Charles won a victory against the Muslims at Tunis. But like the West’s political disunity prior to the fall of the Byzantine Empire, France decided in 1536 to begin allying itself with Muslim Sultan Suleiman against Spain’s Charles V.
As a result, Charles V was forced to sign a humiliating treaty with the Ottomans, allowing them to gain naval dominance on the Mediterranean Sea.
Later notable battles against the Ottomans include:
• Siege of Malta, September 11, 1565;
• Battle of Lepanto, October 7, 1571;
• Battle of Vienna, September 11, 1683;
• Battle of Zenta, September 11, 1697.
An in-depth look at the 1,400 year Islamic conquest is in the book What Every American Needs to Know about the Qur’an—A History of Islam & the United States.
To fully understand how seriously Europe felt threatened, it is insightful to read quotes from notable leaders. As recorded in Luther’s Works—American Edition, 55 volumes (Philadelphia: Fortress; St. Louis: Concordia, 1955–1986, vol. 46:170–171), Martin Luther stated:
The Turk is the rod of the wrath of the Lord our God … If the Turk’s god, the devil, is not beaten first, there is reason to fear that the Turk will not be so easy to beat … Christian weapons and power must do it …
(The fight against the Turks) must begin with repentance, and we must reform our lives, or we shall fight in vain. (The Church should) drive men to repentance by showing our great and numberless sins and our ingratitude, by which we have earned God’s wrath and disfavor, so that He justly gives us into the hands of the devil and the Turk.
Luther wrote in Preface to Book of Revelation (1530):
2nd woe … the 6th [evil] angel, the shameful Mohammed with his companions, the Saracens, who inflicted great plagues on Christendom, with his doctrine and with the sword.
In On War Against the Turk (1529), Luther wrote:
In Luther’s Works (3:121–122), Luther wrote:
The Turk is the very devil incarnate … The Turk fills heaven with Christians by murdering their bodies.
Yet it is more in accordance with the truth to say that the Turk is the Beast, because he is outside the church and openly persecutes Christ.
Luther wrote (Tischreden, 1532, Weimer, ed., 1, 330):
The Turk is the flesh of Antichrist … (which) slaughters bodily by the sword.
John Calvin wrote to Philip Melanchthon in 1543 (Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts & Letters, I:373):
I hear of the sad condition of your Germany! … The Turk again prepares to wage war with a larger force. Who will stand up to oppose his marching throughout the length and breadth of the land, at his mere will and pleasure?
Calvin wrote in Commentary of 2nd Thessalonians:
Since Mohammed was an apostate, he turned his followers, the Turks, from Christ … The sect of Mohammed was like a raging overflow, which in its violence tore away about half of the Church.
John Calvin wrote in Commentary on Daniel:
Turks have spread far and wide, and the world is filled with impious despisers of God.
John Calvin wrote in Sermons on Timothy & Titus:
The Turks at this day, can allege and say for themselves: ‘We serve God from our ancestors!’—It is a good while since Mahomet gave them the cup of his devilish dreams to drink, and they got drunk with them. It is about a thousand years since cursed hellhounds were made drunk with their follies—Let us be wise and discreet!—For otherwise, we shall be like the Turks and Heathen.
John Calvin wrote in Institutes of the Christian Religion (Book II, Chapter VI):
For even if many men once boasted that they worshiped … the Maker of heaven and earth, yet because they had no Mediator it was not possible for them truly to taste God’s mercy, and thus be persuaded that he was their Father …
So today the Muslim Turks, although they proclaim at the top of their lungs that the Creator of heaven and earth is God, still, while repudiating Christ, substitute an idol in place of the true God.
John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, wrote in The Doctrine of Original Sin (1817, p. 35; Works, 1841, ix. 205):
Let us now calmly and impartially consider what manner of men the Mahometans in general are … Men who have but a moderate share of reason, cannot but observe in his Koran … the most gross and impious absurdities … Who can swallow such absurdities as divinely revealed. Mahometans not only condemn all who cannot swallow them to everlasting fire; not only appropriate to themselves the title of … true believers: but even anathematise … all their brethren … who contend for a figurative interpretation.
That these men then have no knowledge or love of God is undeniably manifest, not only from their gross, horrible notions of him, but from their not loving their brethren … Mahometans will butcher each other by thousands … Why is it that such numbers of Turks and Persians have stabbed one another in cool blood?
Truly, because they differ in the manner of dressing their head. The Ottoman vehemently maintains … that a Mussulman should wear a round turban … whereas the Persian insists upon his liberty of conscience, and will wear it picked before.
So, for this wonderful reason … they beat out each other’s brains from generation to generation.
Ever since the religion of Mahomet appeared in the world, the espousers of it, particularly those under the Turkish emperor, have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations; rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth …
Numberless cities are razed from the foundation, and only their name remaining … Many countries which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness … Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of humankind!
Jonathan Edwards, first President of Princeton, wrote in A History of the Work of Redemption (1739):
Those mighty kingdoms of Antichrist and Mohammed … trampled the world under foot … Great works of the devil … swallowed up the Ancient Roman Empire … Satan’s Mohometan kingdom (swallowed) the Eastern Empire.
Jonathan Edwards stated in The Fall of Antichrist (1829, NY: S. Converse pub., part vii, p. 395):
In 1258, two centuries before the Reformation, Thomas Aquinas wrote Summa contra Gentiles (translated by Anton C. Pegis, University of Notre Dame Press, 1975). He wrote in Book 1, Chapter 6:
By the false prophet … here an eye seems to be had to Mahomet, whom his followers call the great prophet of God. (Revelation 16:13)
Mohammed … seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us … and he gave free reign to carnal pleasure.
In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and doctrines of the greatest falsity.
He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration …
On the contrary, Mohammed said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants … Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Mohammed forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms …
He perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity … Those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.
Voltaire (1694–1778) wrote the play Fanaticism, or Mahomet, explaining to Pope Benedict XIV, August 17, 1745:
Your holiness will pardon the liberty taken by … this performance written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect. To whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet.
Voltaire wrote to Frederick II of Prussia, December 1740, referring to Muhammad:
But that a camel-merchant should stir up insurrection in his village; that in league with some miserable followers he persuades them that he talks with the angel Gabriel; that he boasts of having been carried to heaven, where he received in part this unintelligible book, each page of which makes common sense shudder;
that, to pay homage to this book, he delivers his country to iron and flame; that he cuts the throats of fathers and kidnaps daughters; that he gives to the defeated the choice of his religion or death: this is assuredly nothing any man can excuse, at least if he was not born a Turk, or if superstition has not extinguished all natural light in him.
Montesquieu wrote in The Spirit of the Laws (1748):
Moderate government is most agreeable to the Christian Religion, and a despotic government to the Mahometan …
While the Mahommedan princes incessantly give or receive death, the religion of the Christians renders their princes … less cruel …
It is the Christian religion that … has hindered despotic power …
From the characters of the Christian and Mahometan religions, we ought, without any further examination, to embrace the one and reject the other:
The Mahometan Religion, which speaks only by the sword, acts still upon men with that destructive spirit with which it was founded.
Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–1776) wrote in Of the Standard of Taste (1760):
Followers of the Qur’an insist on the excellent moral precepts interspersed through that wild and absurd performance.
It is to be supposed, that the Arabic words, which correspond to the English, equity, justice, temperance, meekness, charity … must always be taken in a good sense; and it would have argued the greatest ignorance, not of morals, but of language, to have mentioned them with any epithets, besides those of applause and approbation.
But would we know, whether the pretended prophet had really attained a just sentiment of morals? Let us attend to his narration; and we shall soon find, that he bestows praise on such instances of treachery, inhumanity, cruelty, revenge, bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society.
No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far only as it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers.
PEACE OF AUGSBURG—The most powerful man in the Western World was Charles V of Spain. Being the Catholic Holy Roman Emperor, he exercised controlled over most of Europe, as well as areas in the Americas and the Philippines.
Charles V was faced with a double dilemma:
1) Protestant Reformation on one hand;
2) Muslim invasion on the other hand.
As the Turks rapidly advanced up the Danube River, Charles V of Spain decided to strike a deal with the Protestants.
In 1532, an initial truce was negotiated in Nuremburg. Then in 1555, Charles V negotiated the monumental Peace of Augsburg.
Eric W. Gritisch wrote in Martin–God’s Court Jester: Luther in Retrospect (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983, p. 69–70):
Afraid of losing the much-needed support of the German princes for the struggle against the Turkish threat from the south, Emperor Charles V agreed to a truce between Protestant and Catholic territories …
Thus the Lutheran movement was, for the first time, officially tolerated and could enjoy a place in the political sun of the Holy Roman Empire.
The Peace of Augsburg in 1555, which was the first treaty to recognize Protestants, contained a little Latin phrase that had enormous repercussions across Europe: “curios regio eius religio,” which meant “whose is the reign his is the religion.”
In other words, the Treaty allowed each king to decide what would be believed in his kingdom if they agreed to work together to stop the Islamic invasion into Europe.