In yesterday’s Opinion Journal, Irshad Manji writes that “Muslims, like Jews and Christians, must own up to problems in their holy book.” He mainly deals with the Koran and Islam, but he throws in Judaism and Christianity, perhaps to sound more fair.

In the days following September 11, Muslim spokespeople mouthed the mantra that the Koran makes it absolutely clear when jihad can and can’t be pursued, and the terrorists unquestionably crossed the line. To quote a Muslim American scholar who typified this perspective, Allah “says in unequivocal terms that to kill an innocent being is like killing entire humanity.”

Wishful whitewashing. The Koran verse that’s cited as “unequivocal” actually bestows wiggle room. Here’s how it fully reads: “We laid it down for the Israelites,” meaning those who believe in one God, “that whoever killed a human being, except as punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be regarded as having killed all mankind.” Sadly, the clause starting with “except” can be deployed by militant Muslims to fuel their jihads. That’s precisely how Nicholas Berg’s executioners justified their travesty.

Which means religion is no innocent bystander in the violence perpetrated by Muslims. Just as moderate Christians and Jews acknowledge the nasty side of their holy texts, modern Muslims ought to come clean about how our sacred script informs terror. One can argue that certain passages are being politically exploited–and, indeed, they are. The point is, however, that they couldn’t be exploited if they didn’t exist….

Moderate Muslims, like moderate Christians and Jews, shouldn’t be afraid to ask: What if our holy script isn’t perfect? What if it’s inconsistent, even contradictory? What if it’s riddled with human biases?

Manji is trying to argue that Islam ultimately is a religion of peace, but only for those who reject the clear and intended meaning of the Koran. A “moderate” Muslim is one who rejects the portions of Koran that say things that are currently politically incorrect or that make us uncomfortable. (Does this sound at all familiar to those who have been exposed to the liberal “Christian” church?)

In other words, to make Islam a religion of peace, you have to reject its foundational document as being “inconsistent, even contradictory” and so be enabled to reject the parts that clearly teach violence against non-Muslims. This makes Islam into an a-la-cart religion, where you take what you like, and leave that which you don’t.

In Christianity, I would consider that anyone who rejected the Bible is not a Christian. Christianity is based upon God’s revelation of Himself as revealed in His Word that He has given to us. To pick and choose what we will accept from His word is to reject His Word.

Since Islam considers itself a religion of the book (the Koran), it seems logical to assume that anyone who rejects the Koran, also must reject Islam. Therefore to believe Islam is a religion of peace, you have to reject the foundation of Islam (the Koran) and ultimately you reject Islam itself. This leaves a moderate Muslim as one who doesn’t really believe in Islam. That is what a moderate Muslim is.