1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

A correct explanation of Scripture about Jesus and the sword...

Reader comment on item: Islamists, Get Out
in response to reader comment: Jihad and Islam -Read it carefully friends

Submitted by Sara Bennett (United States), Dec 30, 2013 at 23:12

Dear Nida,

I have just now come across your comments in response to another article, and your comments about Jesus really distressed me. Just as you fear, and cannot stand that, others have taken the teachings of Islam way out of context and have missed its true meaning, you have done the exact same thing to the teachings of Jesus and the true meaning of Christianity.

All I see displayed on the news in America are horrible images of war being waged within Islamic nations...many of these wars fought are on their own soil and amongst themselves, and I see the most sad images of innocents (old and young) that have suffered...bodies battered and ripped apart by the most terrible means imagined. There are people that have been physically mutilated, young and old, by Islamic leadership in its effort to advance its agenda. I understand that you say true Islam does not hold to this teaching and Allah would never support those actions, but why do we see SO many Islamic nations experiencing these kinds of battles and turmoil on their own soil on an almost daily basis???

I would love to believe that Islam is peaceful as you have plead its case in this forum. I have a lot of respect for everything you explained about your religion, but I can also see where you have completely done against my own religion (Christianity) what you cannot stand to be done against yours.

In your defense, I do understand that you do not like violence and it probably breaks your heart, as it does mine, to see visions of young children on a televistion screen being carried away on stretchers, lifeless and bloodied, while their parents or townsfolk cry out in anguish...all while bombs are exploding in the background, and people are frantically trying to find shelter.

The reason I bring up instances like the one I just mentioned is because I cannot stand to see someone on the news that says they are a Christian and says that God told them to kill someone or carry out some act of violence in His Name, when God would never stand for it.

As I understand it, the word you regard as Holy, and the one I regard as Holy, both begin with the same five books...or similar versions. Your book also speaks of Moses and Abraham...Isaac and Ishmael. The battles that occurred in the beginning of our Holy Book are the same as in yours. You stated in your post the reasons that support when war is acceptable in Islam and these same rules apply for today. One of those reasons was when someone or some other culture attacks Islam or incites war against Islam. With that in mind, the Christian Bible's Old Testament followed something similar to that. When Moses was instructed to wage war, or battle was called for, it was usually in instances of standing against cultures that had attacked God's people or were infiltrating God's people and corrupting them/leading them away from His truth. In order to understand the context of why battles were waged you have to do deeper study and search other Scripture from that time period. War was never waged because God hated His actual creation. He hated the corruption that existed. The original meaning in Scriptures that we read today that speak of God hating are usually stating that God hated what someone was doing. He hated the evil in someone's heart. He could see through their motives and He hated those things that would lure His people away from Him. In many instances, He gave His people instruction on how to overcome and take what He had rightfully placed in their hands. Many wars were waged on behalf of God's people in an effort to purge evil customs out and away from them at the hands of those that had knowingly and deceptively infiltrated God's people and their culture.

Many times the true meaning behind words in Scripture are not understood properly and they are taken completely out of context. It is SO important for everyone to go back and study the Hebrew and Greek meanings behind certain words and how those words are used in different Scriptures in order to know what the true meaning was and why wars were waged, etc.

When Jesus came in the New Testamament, He came to fulfill the Law...In the New Covenant for God's people there is Grace. There is no condemnation, and there is never a call for violence. Those that have waged war in the name of Christianity since the coming of Jesus have acted completely out of line, and were not following what Jesus taught. I believe you are saying the same thing regarding the images of Islamic leadership that we see waging attacks on innocent people...you say that those leaders or groups of people that we call terrorist groups are not acting in the name of true Islam. We Christians can also say that there are MANY that have acted and done things in the name of Christianity, but their actions were exactly the opposite of what Jesus told us to do.

I found a great site, and I will include a link to it here so I can give credit where it is due, and I am also going to paste the author's words here, because they address and explain some of the Scripture you incorrectly used to back up your reason why Jesus is not one to be believed...You took all three Scriptures out of context, and I am afraid that your reasoning may lead people astray from the true meaning behind Christian Scriptures and what Jesus said.

The explanation to one of the verses you took out of context is as follows, and the link to the website I am citing here will be after the explanation. Thank you for reading my post; I pray I have been able to help make some sense of the Scriptures that you have misunderstood. Thank you for your honesty and sincerity in your love for God and His Truth...I pray God blesses you with His understanding and a life full of His Love, Joy, and Peace. In the Name of Jesus:

A Brief Explanation of the Sword in Matthew 10:34

James M. Arlandson

I read constantly that Christians should not be proud of a verse attributed to Jesus. The verse reads:

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword.

At first glance it indeed appears that Jesus encourages violence and calls his disciples to practice it, presumably righteous violence. But appearances can be deceiving. A text without a context often becomes a pretext, as the old saying goes. Once this verse is read in its historical and literary contexts, the meaning will change.

It is time to set the record straight about that verse.

The historical context, we should recall, is Jewish culture, as Jesus ministers to his own people. He sends out the twelve disciples to the "lost sheep of Israel," not yet to the gentiles, who will be reached after the Resurrection. It is not surprising, historically speaking, that he would spread his word by proclamation to his own, by Jewish disciples. Second, he predicts that some towns may not receive the disciples and that the authorities may put them on trial and flog them. In that eventuality, they should shake the dust off their feet, pray for them, and flee to another city. Third, it is only natural that first-century Jews may not understand this new sect or "Jesus movement" (as sociologists of the New Testament call it), so they resist it. Does this mean, then, that Jesus calls for a holy war with a physical, military sword against his fellow Jews—say, against his own family who wanted to take custody of him because they thought he was "out of his mind" (Mark 3:21)?

Next, those cultural facts explain the immediate literary context, which shows division among family members. The context must be quoted in full to explain the meaning of "sword" in Matthew 10:34 (bold print):

32 "Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. 34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn

a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—

36 a man's enemies will be the members of his own household [Micah 7:6]

37 Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."

The one key element in this lengthy passage is the word "sword," and its meaning is now clear. It indicates that following Jesus in his original Jewish society may not bring peace to a family, but may "split" it up, the precise function of a metaphorical sword. Are his disciples ready for that? This kind of spiritual sword invisibly severs a man from his father, and daughter from her mother, and so on (Micah 7:6). Given Jesus' own family resistance early on (they later came around), it is only natural he would say that no matter what the cost, one must follow him to the end, even if it means giving up one's family. But this applies only if the family rejects the new convert, not if the family accepts him in his new faith; he must not reject them, because the whole point of Jesus' advent is to win as many people to his side as possible, even if this divides the world in two, but never violently. (my emphasis to the statement added and in other segments to follow).

Furthermore, we can reference the larger textual context in the Gospel of Matthew. In the Garden of Gethsemane, during the hour when Jesus was betrayed and arrested, Peter struck off the ear of the servant of the high priest in order to protect his Lord. But Jesus tells him to stop.

Matthew 26:52-53 says:

52 "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?" (NIV)

Jesus denounces violence to accomplish the will of God—at least as Peter imagines the will of God. Then Jesus says that he has more than twelve legions of angels at his disposal. He did not come to crush the Roman Empire. Instead, he willingly lays down his life and dies for the sins of the whole world. Will it accept this wonderful gift?

Now we can appeal to even a much larger textual context. The non-literal interpretation of the sword is confirmed by a parallel passage in the Gospel of Luke.

Luke 12:49-53 reads:

49 "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo [my death], and how distressed I am until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law."

It is entirely possible that these two parallel passages in Matthew and Luke represent two different occasions. After all, when I teach the same topic in two different classes, I also change the wording a little. Neither class knows about the slight change, but this does not matter, for the meaning is essentially the same. Likewise, in the three years that Jesus taught, he most likely repeated this call to commitment several times to different audiences (though recorded only twice in the Gospels), as he crisscrossed Israel. He issued such radical calls often, telling his listeners to pick up their cross and to follow him (Matt. 16:24; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23, 14:27).

Whatever the case, the proper way to interpret Scripture is to let verses clarify other verses, particularly parallel passages. And now Luke 12:49-53 confirms our interpretation of Matt. 10:34. Jesus did not endorse physical violence against one's own family, but he warns people about possible family division.

So what does all of this mean?

History demonstrates that Jesus never wielded a sword against anyone, and in Matt. 10:34 he does not order his followers to swing one either, in order to kill their family opponents or for any reason. But a true disciple who is worthy of following Christ and who comes from a possibly hostile family has to use a sword of the will (never a physical sword) to sever away all opposition, even as far as taking up his cross—another metaphorical implement for the disciples. It is true that Jesus divides the world into two camps, those who follow him, and those who do not, those in the light, and those in the dark. However, he never tells his followers to wage war on everyone else, and certainly not on one's family.

It is true that the Roman Emperor Constantine, Medieval Crusaders, and Protestants and Catholics have used the sword against unbelievers and each other. However, none of them is foundational to Christianity—only Jesus is, and he never endorses the sword to spread his message. Also, Christianity has undergone Reform (c. 1400-1600) and has been put under the pressure of the Enlightenment (c. 1600-1800), which demanded peace. Be that as it may, Jesus himself never calls for military holy war, and only he sets the genetic code for his movement.

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that calls the Church to commit violence to spread the gospel or to plant churches or to accomplish anything else. Rather, the New Testament hands the sword over to the State (Rom. 13:1-6). In any case, Jesus says a spiritual sword, not a physical one, may sever family ties, so his disciples must be ready for that.

Go here to begin a series on pacifism and the sword in the New Testament.

Copyright by James Malcolm Arlandson.

Articles by James Arlandson

link to website: http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/matthew_10_34.htm


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".

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (216) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
21Islam has no future in the West [102 words]EricDJul 16, 2008 13:47135282
5Suicidal [76 words]PapaFeb 22, 2010 19:50135282
2No. [134 words]MuhammadSep 3, 2010 22:09135282
271 plus Billion Muslim and... [84 words]ToniSep 26, 2010 16:31135282
what a powerful argument for the apologists to answer [4 words]rajeevSep 27, 2010 03:35135282
2PRIME EXAMPLE [10 words]Heathen RulerJun 26, 2011 13:59135282
6let in only good muslims [38 words]Phil GreendMay 18, 2008 01:35128970
6Among Muslims,Those who kill Infidels like you are considered the best. [69 words]James ThomasOct 11, 2010 17:58128970
1Who Told U this [177 words]ZeeshanDec 13, 2010 08:43128970
1Thanks all [231 words]Dr.KarimFeb 26, 2006 09:3138073
5be serious [93 words]not worriedApr 8, 2006 15:2838073
1To Dr Karim and Nida [113 words]wamahNov 7, 2006 17:3338073
the Greater Australian Caliphate [60 words]davidFeb 13, 2006 18:5835458
China is Next [35 words]cFeb 24, 2006 03:4435458
1excuse me??? [37 words]D. LennonAug 3, 2008 06:5935458
4ISLAM-The religion of peace [2755 words]Nida MukhtarJan 20, 2006 11:0432053
9Nida - Are you for real..? [336 words]TonyFeb 9, 2006 21:2532053
6Nida -Where were you Born? [44 words]EmileoFeb 10, 2006 07:3132053
nida...totally right.. [30 words]ahmad zafireFeb 15, 2006 03:4032053
1Jihad and Islam -Read it carefully friends [5159 words]Nida MukhtarFeb 18, 2006 10:1232053
1Missing The Point [62 words]BlewynFeb 22, 2006 10:2032053
2Sure... [20 words]AnneMar 9, 2006 20:5732053
Thanks Anne, Blewyn and Ahmad. [135 words]Nida MukhtarMar 13, 2006 11:5632053
As usual you are right Nida. [90 words]F. AnwarApr 19, 2006 15:0532053
4‘al-Taqiyya' [348 words]PeteApr 29, 2007 02:0332053
5Islam is NOT peace - That statement is fallacious [47 words]FredJun 26, 2007 20:4032053
Nida i loved your effort [67 words]amna virkSep 23, 2007 07:1732053
please do not speak out of ignorance. [115 words]AmilaMay 21, 2008 21:4732053
3reply to letter from NIDA MUKHTAR [87 words]Heinz SchmidJun 2, 2008 13:3132053
2Islam is a religion of a PIECE! [8 words]MunirAug 9, 2008 06:3832053
5Same old deceiption just like the title argument suggests [225 words]EvanOct 5, 2010 09:5632053
1If only [157 words]GarethOct 10, 2010 14:2732053
1Stop talking in circles. [12 words]GETHE,,,Feb 27, 2012 17:3032053
1HAHAHA [119 words]TruxMar 6, 2012 13:3832053
Context, Not Religious Ignorance [174 words]DWApr 21, 2013 21:5532053
A correct explanation of Scripture about Jesus and the sword... [2469 words]Sara BennettDec 30, 2013 23:1232053
Do your studies of all the Islamic books, not just the early Koran. [169 words]GrahamSep 16, 2016 00:1532053
1Canada's open welcome mat [15 words]ralphDec 26, 2005 15:0230576
Crime pays in Canada... [81 words]RobDec 29, 2005 19:2930576
1Legal entry to Canada not welcome [147 words]Mark FlodenFeb 23, 2006 09:4830576
4Cause of Sydney Riot [428 words]NewgamersDec 23, 2005 02:5630434
1More recent news on Sydney Riots [274 words]John FuredyJun 20, 2006 01:0230434
Most recent news of the precipitating event [156 words]John FuredyJun 21, 2006 04:0730434
1Where did the laws come from? [165 words]ddsDec 20, 2005 14:4930274
1Sydney Riots [455 words]GDec 18, 2005 19:5130163
2That's Allah Folks! [207 words]CFeb 21, 2006 17:5030163
To G [38 words]David SmithFeb 25, 2006 09:0230163
Reply to Walter [5 words]DeanNov 22, 2005 20:1428728
Pipes' Bashing at Uni of Toronto [457 words]Patrick McGeeNov 4, 2005 16:3527786
2UofT administration continues to protect Muslims and increasingly abuse academic freedom [199 words]John FuredyJun 19, 2006 00:5327786
Question to Shazia [189 words]John GiannascaOct 27, 2005 19:2927428
Reply to Malik [155 words]John GiannascaOct 27, 2005 19:1827427
and don't forget about the Islamists in the Caribbean, either... [1893 words]pollyannanomorenowaynohow!Oct 22, 2005 13:3527208
looking for a book !! [54 words]Tim TaylorOct 2, 2008 09:3027208
"Islamic charity's copy of Quran calls for ‘race to jihad' [408 words]SophieOct 17, 2005 09:1627008
Response to Western View of Jihad [669 words]Ali IbrahimFeb 16, 2006 09:3327008
why? [13 words]asriJul 21, 2009 04:1327008
Reply to Malik [27 words]MaryOct 17, 2005 06:3427004
1Destruction of a way of life [379 words]Malik al-KuffarOct 16, 2005 12:5226995
1The wages of sin [195 words]Malik al-KuffarOct 13, 2005 08:0226898
1Mohammed's post [30 words]Reply to MalikOct 12, 2005 10:1726856
Reply to Walter [345 words]Swahili DinazOct 6, 2005 14:5226643
Reply to Shazia [137 words]Malik al-KuffarOct 4, 2005 16:3826591
2Islamists get out! [76 words]MaryOct 2, 2005 06:3726525
Abrogation, response to Shazia [108 words]MohammedSep 29, 2005 17:4126466
Real Islam, Response to Shazia [499 words]Robert W.Sep 29, 2005 13:5726458
Fighting in Islam, Response to Shazia [589 words]A.ASep 29, 2005 13:1426455
NNNOOOOO WWAAAYYY [65 words]A MuslimMay 5, 2009 14:1626455
1Real Islam, response to Shazia [150 words]MohammedSep 28, 2005 19:5026431
Mecca and Madina ayas, response to Shazia [515 words]Hisham M.Sep 28, 2005 14:0926424
Response to Mohammed [287 words]Shazia KhanumSep 28, 2005 08:5826405
Another Response to A.A. [560 words]Shazia KhanumSep 28, 2005 08:4626404
Comment on Shazia's post [84 words]MohammedSep 27, 2005 14:2326372
1Response to Shazia, abrogated ayas [169 words]A.A.Sep 27, 2005 13:1726364
Response to Malik [498 words]Shazia KhanumSep 26, 2005 10:1526317
to Rick [458 words]FreelancerSep 25, 2005 13:0026290
Inconsistency or what? [302 words]Malik al-KuffarSep 25, 2005 10:1926284
More action and less of words, freelancer [284 words]RickSep 24, 2005 19:4126264
to Alonnehhob [63 words]FreelancerSep 23, 2005 16:3526230
I hear you Freelancer [242 words]AllonehhobSep 23, 2005 14:3626224
Thank you Rick and Freelancer [457 words]AllonahhobSep 23, 2005 13:3026220
Reply to Rick [421 words]FreelancerSep 23, 2005 08:3126202
1You must be kidding Freelancer [398 words]RickSep 22, 2005 21:1026190
1Infidels [280 words]stuartJan 17, 2006 20:2326190
response to Alonnehhob [424 words]FreelancerSep 22, 2005 08:2826162
With respect to all [680 words]AlonnehhobSep 21, 2005 13:5826132
Response to A.A. [338 words]Shazia KhanumSep 20, 2005 21:1126101
1Response to Samir [254 words]A.A.Sep 20, 2005 14:3226064
Reply to James [58 words]RickSep 20, 2005 14:1326060
Separating Islam from Leaders [149 words]FreelancerSep 19, 2005 17:2226035
1Samir I pity you [121 words]DianaSep 19, 2005 12:2426025
The United States Must Conquer Iran [311 words]JamesSep 15, 2005 21:4625882
your vision is not really right at all [122 words]italianJan 2, 2006 18:3125882
Cores beliefs [183 words]Israel LachovskySep 14, 2005 23:0925852
synagogue burning in Gaza [53 words]ira levineSep 12, 2005 16:3725725
To Freelancer [548 words]DaisySep 12, 2005 13:5625719
Annihilate Islamist Lunacy [384 words]columbusSep 11, 2005 14:0325647
A Catalyst [188 words]AndrewNov 23, 2006 19:1625647
Response to A.A. [893 words]SamirSep 9, 2005 21:5425626
2Time for us all to recognise what extremists actually do! [219 words]MarieMay 3, 2006 20:1225626
Allegiance to this country - a test that should apply to all [69 words]Bill NovingerSep 7, 2005 17:0325571
response to yoven [238 words]garySep 7, 2005 00:4325542
Responses to various... [1343 words]FreelancerSep 6, 2005 17:3025529
1The breaking of Islamism [547 words]WernerSep 5, 2005 23:4625504
islam is hard, but fragile.... [85 words]italianJan 2, 2006 17:4325504
Ban Islamists from the West [286 words]JohnSep 5, 2005 03:0725489
1Northern European Brilliance [102 words]Justin CaseSep 5, 2005 00:2525487
Khomeini's speech, Response to Sultan , Shazia and Samir [349 words]N.K.Sep 3, 2005 20:0225458
weterners as main target [80 words]RavindraSep 3, 2005 19:4225457
Reply to SULTAN [65 words]Donald HudsonSep 2, 2005 21:5725435
To Shazia and Sultan [309 words]WalterSep 2, 2005 14:5525409
Super comments by Shazia [673 words]SULTANSep 2, 2005 13:4325396
Quran and non muslims, Response to Samir [280 words]A.A.Sep 2, 2005 11:1425387
1Muslims/islamists out [218 words]DanSep 2, 2005 10:5225383
1i want my kids to grow up safe [19 words]deek (want my country back)Feb 11, 2007 23:1525383
What may fly in UK - without a constitution - versus USA constitutional culture [200 words]David J. BardinSep 2, 2005 10:0625377
Terror, Disaster and Federal vs. States Rights [223 words]John Randall PeacherSep 1, 2005 19:3025347
Reply to Carl [125 words]MarySep 1, 2005 18:3125345
Whom to believe, Response to Walter [118 words]Mamdouh M.Sep 1, 2005 18:1425343
Bold and Accurate [51 words]Harry RileySep 1, 2005 17:4125341
1Response to Samir and Shazia Khanum [797 words]Abdulllah A.Sep 1, 2005 17:2525339
Let them all go now! [81 words]David ChanskySep 1, 2005 17:0525337
1Off the Record [140 words]CFeb 23, 2006 20:1925337
Citizenship requirements [207 words]Yehoshua ZellerSep 1, 2005 14:4625332
Don't believe me, do not believe them [169 words]samirSep 1, 2005 14:2325328
Reply to Amitabh Tripathi on a compact of civilised cultures [246 words]Swahili DinazSep 1, 2005 13:4225322
160Taqiyya and Kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic Terrorism [318 words]Donald HudsonSep 1, 2005 11:3525320
Why should I give up my "Idea of the West" [95 words]SteveFeb 14, 2006 14:4825320
2Taqiyya is a deception modailty used by Shiites and Sunnis. [57 words]Dr A. CampbellNov 14, 2008 05:2325320
sunni do not believe in taqiyaah or kitman [43 words]monaDec 23, 2009 11:2825320
Forewarned & Preparing [29 words]Rob ParksAug 10, 2010 09:1225320
ridiculous [33 words]Ron BSep 15, 2010 16:4925320
Taqiyya is a deception modailty used by Shiites and Sunnis? [186 words]Justin CaseJan 25, 2012 11:4725320
Definition vs Practice [253 words]PrashantJan 28, 2012 18:3825320
Taquiya and Oaths [119 words]stranchanJun 12, 2012 02:3825320
Not correct [22 words]GlennOct 1, 2012 20:3525320
T&K [26 words]Joe1938Nov 25, 2013 19:5825320
islam is not peaceful [9 words]jJes GarzaFeb 25, 2015 15:3925320
other names [22 words]islamorealistApr 18, 2017 19:4225320
taqiyya [98 words]Philip MartinJan 27, 2018 11:3325320
1Response to Freelancer [256 words]Carl SametSep 1, 2005 10:5025318
1"Islamism" vs. "Islam" and The Meaning of "Jihad" [871 words]Shazia KhanumSep 1, 2005 09:5725314
1religion [9 words]AnonomiousMay 30, 2010 15:5525314
Responding To WALTER.... [166 words]Jacob CarmielSep 1, 2005 09:4725313
Double standards [164 words]Øyvind SørøySep 1, 2005 09:1425312
Response to Freelancer [274 words]jan VinkSep 1, 2005 05:4225311
Response to Reuben [350 words]MarySep 1, 2005 05:2325310
1Islamists Unwelcome [98 words]Gerald LafonSep 1, 2005 02:3725308
islam is a religion of peace [60 words]juned begDec 17, 2008 04:5125308
Bad Actor's Guild [420 words]orange yonasonAug 31, 2005 22:2625303
Not the case now [104 words]StasMay 25, 2012 22:1525303
Freedom in America [236 words]FreelancerAug 31, 2005 20:5425301
Samir, Who Should We Believe? [344 words]WalterAug 31, 2005 20:1325300
The first to speak in the land of the free, and the home of the brave. [52 words]David W. LincolnAug 31, 2005 20:1225299
Thank You, Mr. Pipes! [86 words]Dan HollowayAug 31, 2005 18:0125294
1Islamists in Israel [212 words]yuval brandstetterAug 31, 2005 17:1825292
response to jennifer king [505 words]samirAug 31, 2005 17:0325289
Response to Gerald Lankin [173 words]Carl SametAug 31, 2005 14:2725287
1Intructions for Muslims in the Infidel World [1475 words]Jennifer KingAug 31, 2005 13:1825283
Standing Up Against Islamists [787 words]Chris ChrismanAug 31, 2005 12:1425280
Islamists Come to Canada [908 words]WalterAug 31, 2005 11:4725278
Islamists [133 words]YovenAug 31, 2005 11:3625276
It goes both ways.... [151 words]Richard JarrowAug 31, 2005 11:3025275
Slogans Won't Get Islamists Out [217 words]JaladhiAug 31, 2005 11:2125274
Who Will Be the First [160 words]Arlinda DeAngelisAug 31, 2005 08:3725270
Loyalty Oath, Lying Immigrants, and Ideological Gatekeeping [204 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Constantine KipnisAug 31, 2005 07:4025268
Read and Heed [64 words]Margery FeinsteinAug 31, 2005 06:1425266
Reason for American politicians' reticence [168 words]Jim BondAug 31, 2005 05:4125263
1Australia still in denial [1522 words]Reuben HorneAug 31, 2005 05:2425262
bias on italian media vision of australian disorder [81 words]italianJan 2, 2006 17:1625262
"Islamic double-talk" [1263 words]LactantiusJan 18, 2006 08:5425262
Political Agenda Disguised as Religion [130 words]T. CorcoranFeb 21, 2006 16:5225262
Other sources of information on this [62 words]MarielApr 21, 2007 10:3125262
1wishful thinking:Canadian perspective [250 words]JayAug 31, 2005 03:2425259
I can practice my religion without breaking the law... [69 words]Jacob CarmielAug 31, 2005 03:1925258
Deport supporters of terrorism and build more robotic weapons systems [130 words]John GellesAug 31, 2005 00:5625256
Tricky, sticky wicket [115 words]Jeremy KarekenAug 31, 2005 00:2125255
There is One American [316 words]PatAug 30, 2005 23:4025253
Your articles are excellent! [285 words]Dale EhrgottAug 30, 2005 22:0925251
Be Positive [2536 words]Nida MukhtarJan 19, 2006 06:4925251
Who are false prophets [53 words]EbenezerFeb 11, 2006 22:2625251
Original Teachings Of A True Prophet [30 words]Nida MukhtarFeb 20, 2006 06:5025251
Islamists, Get out [268 words]Faqi HusssainAug 30, 2005 21:4825248
1Islamists, Get Out! [95 words]DvoraAug 30, 2005 21:1025247
Islam' s reign of terror [110 words]Edgar Malcolm ErvinAug 30, 2005 20:2925245
Islamists get out! [30 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Charles M. GriffithAug 30, 2005 19:3925242
Common courtesy is still in order [96 words]Gerald LankinAug 30, 2005 19:2325241
Choice of words [141 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
George AdamowiczAug 30, 2005 19:0025239
Minor factual error and related comment [98 words]Warren MarshallAug 30, 2005 18:3325237
1Islamsists, Get Out [313 words]Dr.Bernard VAug 30, 2005 18:0825236
1No difference in Islam [55 words]Southern(USA)whiteboyAug 30, 2005 18:0825235
GLIMMERS OF AWAKENINGS? [133 words]Ruth LowryAug 30, 2005 17:1425234
Do you believe in miracles? [36 words]tonymixanAug 30, 2005 15:5425232
About Time! [97 words]JaneAug 30, 2005 15:1025228
1About Time [460 words]yehoshua ZellerAug 30, 2005 14:3525227
1Adapt or Go [44 words]Margaret YoungAug 30, 2005 14:3325226
1Its about time [60 words]Derek JohnAug 30, 2005 14:2725225
Why there is not even a single quote from American politicians? [14 words]yvAug 30, 2005 14:1625223
Don't cheer too loud [40 words]Fred LipsigAug 30, 2005 14:0125219
Quebec Example Inappropriate [392 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
WalterAug 30, 2005 13:5625218
Financed by the Wahabis and Muslims brotherhood [133 words]MoussaDec 3, 2009 04:0925218
Taking a stand based on facts! [25 words]LanceAug 30, 2005 13:5225217
S.Berman [47 words]Brooks ImperialAug 30, 2005 13:5025216
Blunt but Accurate [21 words]Joy WezelmanAug 30, 2005 13:2925213
something to learn from the Europeans... [170 words]batya daganAug 30, 2005 13:1925211
Islamists to conform or get out [83 words]Ray HardyAug 30, 2005 13:1125210
Standing Up for Tradition? [52 words]Stephen BermanAug 30, 2005 13:0425209
2Islamists, GET OUT! [45 words]Karen D. RosenthalAug 30, 2005 12:5825208
1If you don't want to be a regular citizen, get out [143 words]Donald W. BalesAug 30, 2005 12:3525207
1Cultural treaty is required [156 words]Amitabh tripathiAug 30, 2005 12:3525206
Right on! [29 words]Dr. Leonard B. ZikeAug 30, 2005 12:2725205
Legislation against islamist danger [35 words]Ayesha AhmedAug 30, 2005 12:2725204
5Soon we can welcome the new european muslim states... [358 words]Emma HorvathFeb 15, 2006 07:0325204
To Emma Horvath [49 words]wamahNov 7, 2006 17:4325204
Time to Re-evaluate [154 words]Virginia CrawfordMar 26, 2003 16:177689

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to A correct explanation of Scripture about Jesus and the sword... by Sara Bennett

Email me if someone replies to my comment

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".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)