• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Islam is the most misunderstood religion in contemporary society

Altfish

Veteran Member
I don’t fail to understand that, I understand that isn’t true that Pol Pot didn’t kill people specifically because they were religious, he certainly did.

“The Khmer Rouge also classified people based on their religious and ethnic backgrounds. Under the leadership of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge had a policy of state atheism. All religions were banned, and the repression of adherents of Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism was extensive. Nearly 25,000 Buddhist monks were massacred by the regime. The regime dispersed minority groups, forbidding them to either speak their languages or practise their customs. They especially targeted Muslims, Christians, Western-educated intellectuals, educated people in general, people who had contact with Western countries or Vietnam, disabled people, and ethnic Chinese, Laotians, and Vietnamese. Some were imprisoned in the S-21 camp for interrogation involving torture in cases where a confession was useful to the government. Many others were summarily executed.”

Pol Pot - Wikipedia

What you seem to not understand that I wrote that it would be just a wrong to use a broad brush against atheists for things Pol Pot did as it would to criticize theists for wrongs done by other religionists or those mistaken as religious but not actually done because if religion at all. Thank you for providing an example which makes my point.
He was driven by Marxist-Leninist ideology.
 

Sundance

pursuing the Divine Beloved
Premium Member
Is that ok then?

Ideally, I would prefer that the necessity or even desire for war be abolished. However, realistically speaking, I do not conceive of such as being possible. How this relates to your question, my response is that to instigate conflict on the grounds of religious or irreligious conviction or for any religious body to sanction such conflict is wrong.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
I simply fail to see how this is a credential.

Also... ??? I dont think I understood what youre saying.
There's really nothing about where "credentials" come in. I am a Heathen, a worshiper of the Norse gods, and yet daily I have people thinking that my religion is nothing but a Marvel fanbase; that I worship a superhero caricature, rather than the god and mythic culture that he is based on. As you did, when you said that Thor is a god based on the superhero.
 

GoodbyeDave

Well-Known Member
Jihad warfare means to defend or take back if you are forcefully expelled.
When the first Muslim armies left Arabia and attacked the Byzantine and Persian empires, how was that defensive? When Muslim armies invaded Spain, France, and Italy, how was that defensive? If you go back to the very beginning, Islamic agression started when Muhammad took an army from Medina to Mecca and demanded that the Meccans convert. Do you mean to tell me that if they'd said no, he would have left them in peace?
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Lynchings were done in the name of Christianity as well what is the difference? Can’t blame the west now? Neither can the Middle East be blamed.
Of we can and we do. The West is not to blame for all the witch killings, Crusades, religious oppression of native Americans ,and anti-semitism on behalf of Christianity? Of course they are.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
What always gets me chuckling is the flimsy reasons needed to launch a "defensive" war effort. A mere perceived insult could be a reason enough. Thwarting Muslim expansion efforts could also be used to justify war. It's really a wild card that can be played over any slight - it needen't be due to military advances. Add to this the special emphasis on martyrdom for furthering the spread of Islam and you have a psychopath's dream religion.
Same for US and Russian millitary.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
What always gets me chuckling is the flimsy reasons needed to launch a "defensive" war effort. A mere perceived insult could be a reason enough. Thwarting Muslim expansion efforts could also be used to justify war. It's really a wild card that can be played over any slight - it needen't be due to military advances. Add to this the special emphasis on martyrdom for furthering the spread of Islam and you have a psychopath's dream religion.

Muslim expansion is not considered Jihad. The expansion was done by different Muslim Caliph successors. If you knew history you'd know this. Stop bringing stuff out your ***
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
That does not reflect the historical usage of the term.

Ultimately, though, it was the caliph who, in the era after the Prophet, was thought to ensure the correctness and legitimacy of Muslim faith and practice. In other words, the caliphate was the plausibility structure par excellence of early Islam. Aside from his being a source of guidance, it was also assumed that the Khal ̄ıfat Alla ̄h would lead the Muslims in jihad until da ̄r al-Islam was coextensive with the whole world.

The Roots and Achievements of the Early Proto-Sunni Movement: A Profile and Interpretation
Matthew J. Kuiper - The Muslim World • Volume 104 • JANUARY/APRIL 2014





The source is clearly cited, The Encyclopaedia of the Quran Volume 3 published by Brill. The entry is Jihad.

If you own or have access to the text it shouldn't be too hard to find...

I need the link...Last time someone tried to reference something they referenced from an anti-Muslim website. the last one recently referenced from someone who was considered an extremist. This person tried to pass it off as universally accepted. That is why I need the link to make sure you don't grab it from some anti-Muslim website (which would make your point invalid). But as far as what you wrote I already covered this. You had different Muslim successors and different Caliphs with different agendas.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
As I said, you can't blame the west and you can't blame the east. It is what PEOPLE are protraying about Isalm (or Christianity) - which may be different to what is written

People do things against the name of their faith all the time and yes you can't blame such and such but it happens. If someone's name is Abdullah and something happens in the United States the news looks at terrorist ties. Someone white, they want to look at mental health, again this is established by the media and then the public.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I saw it and am familiar with it. Jihad is the struggle to promote Islam, which isn't always through violent means. But Quran 9:29 (the forced, by violence if necessary, submission to Islam), Taqiyya (Ok to lie and other unethical acts to non-Muslims), and the establishment of a the theocracy of Sharia where the law is dictated by Muslim clerics, are the three prong of an Islamic theocracy. Until Muslims shun those three elements of Islam, it is nothing more than a political entity in Imam's clothing looking to force the world to submit to it.

Are you going to respond to that now or just toss out another red herring.

You're obviously dismissive of what I just said which is universally accepted y scholars so what is it you want me to address? Because even if I address it the correct way you're going to dismiss it if you don't agree so what is your goal in this exchange?
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
And the reason that the rest of Islam is their near-silent opponent is what?

CAIR issued more than 100 releases in which we specifically condemn terrorism during the period from 1994-2015. The organization’s formula on terrorism is simple and comprehensive: CAIR condemns terrorism whenever it happens, wherever it happens, whoever commits it.

CAIR's Anti-Terrorism Campaigns

The problem is the media wants to maintain anti-Islamic hysteria because it brings in ratings. People tune into attacks made by extremists and paint this Islam-terrorist picture because it keeps people watching while other organizations like CAIR are drowned out in the anti-Muslim rhetoric. Same thing happens when some knuckle head kid who happens to be black does something, some people tend to make broad generalizations "blacks make up 13% but commit 50% of the crime" crap, without specifying the demographics or elements that contribute to said crime, you have African-American organizations coming out to defend itself.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
That is a fairly good question. Where is the difference?

It seems clear to me that one key difference is indeed in the doctrines. Christianity is not quite as obsessed with non-believers as Islaam is.

My entire ancestral history disagrees with you......
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
When the first Muslim armies left Arabia and attacked the Byzantine and Persian empires, how was that defensive? When Muslim armies invaded Spain, France, and Italy, how was that defensive? If you go back to the very beginning, Islamic agression started when Muhammad took an army from Medina to Mecca and demanded that the Meccans convert. Do you mean to tell me that if they'd said no, he would have left them in peace?

When did the first Muslim armies leave Arabia (citation please)? What period in the Caliphate system did the Muslims invade Spain, France, and Italy (citation please)?

Do you know the history between the Muslims and the Quraysh or are you pulling stuff out of your butt? The Muslims were killed for adopting monotheism something, that was a no no during that time because you always adopted the religion of your father.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Of we can and we do. The West is not to blame for all the witch killings, Crusades, religious oppression of native Americans ,and anti-semitism on behalf of Christianity? Of course they are.

Ok...BTW did you look at the video by Sheikh Omar Suleiman on women in Islam? Or did you want me to summarize more work for you?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I would have to say Satanism is far more misunderstood than Islam. A good number of Eastern views are also so heavily distorted and twisted that we've had to start saying things like "Western karma" because few people know what Karma is. Though not a religion, Atheism deserves an honorable mention due it being so widely misunderstood. Islam too is misunderstood, but often by its own blind apologists and most overly zealot of critics. For most people it's just a plain lack of knowledge when it comes to Islam.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Muslim expansion is not considered Jihad. The expansion was done by different Muslim Caliph successors. If you knew history you'd know this. Stop bringing stuff out your ***
I keep forgetting that you are the authority above all others. Now reread what I said. I did not say they were. I said that thwarting the Muslim expansion could be used as a pretext to give an idea of how whimsical this notion actually was. Perhaps I know the history better than you.
 
Top