Islam cannot be reformed (so don’t bother)

As well-meaning as they might be, calls to ‘reform’ Islam are a waste of time and doomed to failure.

Let’s look at the logic behind these calls. It goes something like this:

  1. Islam is violent.
  2. Christianity used to be violent.
  3. After the Reformation, Christianity is no longer violent.
  4. Therefore, an ‘Islamic Reformation’ will end Islamic violence as well.

For most people it makes sense. But most people have no idea of history or reality and are therefore unable to determine that the logical progression is actually based on a number of untruths. As such, the conclusion is also entirely flawed.

Let’s go through each step.

  1. Islam is violent

Islam is violent. That is entirely true.

Islam is violent because Islamic teaching is violent. To gain an understanding of how explicitly violent Islam is, one need look no further than the Islamic State’s magazine Rumiyah.

This is important because the Islamic State clearly, concisely and logically explains why Islamic teaching underpins the violence carried out by jihadis. In contrast, useless politicians across the globe continue to claim Islam is peaceful, even though they cannot quote any Islamic teaching to justify their claim.

Of interest, ‘Rumiyah’ means ‘Rome’. The title of this magazine is a demonstration of intent: the Islamic State wants to destroy the centre of Christianity. It has been one of Islam’s goals since its inception.

The latest magazine’s first article is titled, ‘The ruling on the belligerent Christians’. On page one of this article it quotes chapter 9, verse 5 of the Koran:

“And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the musrhikin wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful”

It goes on to outline the default state of a Christian under Islamic law. They can be slaughtered if they are belligerent, and they are belligerent by default if they do not pay the protection tax (jizya) or if they have not been granted security by an Islamic ruler.

Encouragingly, this default state applies regardless of whether the Christian has defamed Islam, is a combatant or has transgressed against the blood, wealth or honour of Muslims.

That’s black and white Islamic teaching going back to the day of Mohammad.

And Islam is not just violent because of its teaching. It’s violent because of the example of Mohammad.

Again from the latest edition of Rumiyah, quoting examples of the life of Mohammad:

The Messenger of Allah said, “War is deception” (Reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim). This concept was demonstrated practically by some of the expeditions commissioned by the Messenger of Allah.

One such example was reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim from Jabir Ibn ‘Abdillah concerning the raid which the Prophet authorized and which was carried out by a small number of the Companions. It was led by Muhammad Ibn Maslamah and they succeeded in killing the Jewish taghut, Ka’b Ibn al Ashraf, after building his confidence and giving him the impression that he was not at threat.

They visited him at night calling him from outside his home, and Ka’b’s wife reacted by saying to him, “I hear a voice, as if it were a voice of blood” or “dripping with blood.” He responded by saying, “It is my brother Muhammad Ibn Maslamah, and my brother through breast-feeding, Abu Nailah. Indeed, if the honourable one is called, he responds even if it causes him risk.”

Muhammad Ibn Maslamah had already prearranged a signal, telling his companions that if they see him grabbing Ka’b’s head they should strike him. Ka’b came out to them, and after tricking him into believing that he only wanted to smell the fragrance on his hair, Muhammad Ibn Maslamah grabbed his head and called out to his companions, so they began stabbing him until they killed him. Other such examples include the raid of ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Atiq who assassinated the enemy of Allah, Abu Rafi’. The hadith is mentioned by al-Bukhari from al-Bara Ibn ‘Azib

It’s hard to imagine a more graphic story of deceit and murder. And the attack was authorised by Mohammad himself.

  1. Christianity used to be violent.

Moving now onto the second point. And this won’t take long.

It won’t take long because there are simply no Bible verses, quotes, anecdotes or fairy tales depicting a Jesus Christ who waged war or had his enemies murdered.

On the contrary, according to Christian teaching, Christ gave up his own life after an entirely unjust trial in which he was declared by the secular authorities to be innocent and by the religious authorities to have committed the ultimate blasphemy of calling himself God.

According to this teaching, Christ responded to his execution by proving his divinity and rising from the dead. He then established a church to teach others to follow his example.

Christian teaching is not violent. Christ’s example is not violent either.

There is simply no proof to the claim that Christianity used to be violent.

There is plenty of evidence that people proclaiming to be Christian have committed violent acts. However, in every case these people violated Christian teaching and did something decidedly unchristian. It is a completely different scenario to Islam, where violence is not only condoned but explicitly taught.

  1. After the Reformation, Christianity is no longer violent.

If Christianity is not violent, then what about the Reformation?

Good question.

The sad truth is that the Reformation did not ‘expunge’ violence from the Christian world, rather it unleashed a mighty wave of bloodshed as this world was viciously torn apart. The European wars of religion raged from 1524 to 1648 and they occurred as a direct result of the Reformation.

Violence occurred as emerging nationalist movements and local rulers seized upon religious differences to carve out power. It only ended after Europe was so totally exhausted from fighting that a truce could be called.

Prior to the Reformation, Western Europe was united behind a central religious authority (the Catholic pope), with various local governments providing secular rule. After the Reformation this central religious authority was gone and emerging nation states took control of religious teaching and doctrine.

It is ironic that the Reformation is associated with the idea of the separation of church and state. It led directly to the establishment of state churches and to state-backed religious violence. Philosophically it led to the deification of the state, an evil idea that flowered in all its terrible glory in Nazi Germany.

Any student of history will know that the Reformation does not provide a solution to Islamic violence. On the contrary, it actually made the Christian world more like Islam.

Islam has never had a central religious authority (since the death of Mohammad) and it too believes that the church and the state should be the same entity. Thanks to the Reformation, those two ideas have been inserted into Europe.

  1. Therefore, an ‘Islamic Reformation’ will end Islamic violence as well.

If Islam is violent, Christianity is not and the Reformation unleashed a wave of nationalist-religious violence in Western Europe, then there is no logical reason to conclude that an Islamic ‘reformation’ will end Islamic violence.

More importantly, the violent parts of Islam cannot simply be explained away or hidden. According to Islamic belief, they are the words of Allah (and therefore divine) or the example of Mohammad (and therefore perfect).

To expunge them from Islam would require expunging both Allah and Mohammad from it as well. That is not a ‘reformation’. That is the creation of an entirely new religion.

Good luck with that. Even if it could be done, there still remains the insurmountable problem of authority.

No one in Islam has the power to decree this new religion. There is no pope.

As such, the truth is that any attempt to reform Islam will only unleash more violence. The last thing we need is an Islamic reformation.

Instead, we need to contain this ideology as much as possible and then do all we can to destroy it. That will help end the violence and free millions of Muslims who have been enslaved by Mohammad’s ideas.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of nine children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On


  1. When three jihadi Muslims wielding machetes burst into a British pub [the Black and Blue] screaming about Allah and Islam, Roy Larner 47 out with his mates ignored the London police handbook to get down, hide, run etc.

    The Millwall fan, charged them with the Millwall battle cry: “Fuck you. I’m Millwall”. [For those not familiar with UK football, Millwall is routinely reviled among Our Betters for its lack of PC, for its racist sledging, its yobbo fans and unashamed White working class culture.] And he fought three armed jihadis with his fists giving the nonMillwall minions plenty of time to obey the London police and be good kaffirs in the midst of an Islamic terror attack. He was knifed eight times.

    Mr Larner is now recovering in hospital. To all appearances he has not learned his lesson. I hope he becomes a hero to the minions.

    Post a Reply
  2. LEARN THE LESSONS. In the early 1970s of the last century, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan suffered an attempted PLO led coup by Palestinian refugees. Bitter fighting put down the insurgency and the result was that ALL Muslim refugees and asylum seekers were removed from urban centres and place in compounds behind barbed wire in the desert. Today, Jordan still applies this policy of isolation. MILLIONS of Muslim refugees and asylum seekers from neighboring countries are housed today on dedicated reservations in tent cities where they are maintained by UNHCR and other aid agencies. Jordan has not had a Jihardist incident for over 40 years which tells you they are onto something. This is the lesson Australia must learn. Muslims cannot be allowed to live among us in urban environments when tenets of their quasi-religion call for the destruction of hosts and their culture. This is why terrorist attacks continue. The only way to manage hostile aliens is to put them on reservations apart from our cities. This will give them the ‘State within a State’ they demand and the ‘Islamic city’ in Australia they crave.

    Post a Reply
    • Peter A. Lord….Absolutely spot on!

      The ‘State within a State’ I would suggest is Antartica.

      If not then there is some suitable land around Marble Bar that may be reminiscent of the ‘Prophet’ Mohamet’s natural habitat.

      Like cancer if fenced in, they can only feed on themselves and will not grow. Rather they will die out.

      Post a Reply
  3. Correct at every point..islam is only interested in conquest..violence. .there is nothing peaceful in this ideologue

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest