The studies on Muslims, so far, have shown that religiosity is associated with criminality

[loverofhumanity]

Sure they can. No-one is spiritually perfect. We're all a work in progress.

Yes I agree but my religion teaches that the spiritual side of man is only good and never does harm to anyone. It is the lower nature, the animalistic nature (ego, lower self) of man, which , if we allow to control us, causes wars and bloodshed etc So if a mans higher nature dominates his life he becomes a saint or true believer while if he allows his lower nature to dominate he becomes a hypocrite and lower than an animal.

A true believer of any Faith i believe, is he who’s higher nature dominates not self and passion. So my religion states that it doesn’t really matter what we call ourselves that we are known by our deeds not our words.

That’s why I pointed out that a Muslim, according to the Quran is a person who lives the life according to the Quran not just in name only but loves and respects all life otherwise he is not a true Muslim.

In the Bible it puts it in a nutshell. It says something like ‘ he who says he loves God but hates his human brother is a liar’. So to me a person can only validate and verify who they claim to be by their deeds not their words.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes I agree but my religion teaches that the spiritual side of man is only good and never does harm to anyone. It is the lower nature, the animalistic nature (ego, lower self) of man, which , if we allow to control us, causes wars and bloodshed etc So if a mans higher nature dominates his life he becomes a saint or true believer while if he allows his lower nature to dominate he becomes a hypocrite and lower than an animal.

A true believer of any Faith i believe, is he who’s higher nature dominates not self and passion. So my religion states that it doesn’t really matter what we call ourselves that we are known by our deeds not our words.

That’s why I pointed out that a Muslim, according to the Quran is a person who lives the life according to the Quran not just in name only but loves and respects all life otherwise he is not a true Muslim.

In the Bible it puts it in a nutshell. It says something like ‘ he who says he loves God but hates his human brother is a liar’. So to me a person can only validate and verify who they claim to be by their deeds not their words.

"That’s why I pointed out that a Muslim, according to the Quran is a person who lives the life according to the Quran not just in name only but loves and respects all life otherwise he is not a true Muslim."

That is true.

Regards

 

[loverofhumanity]

"That’s why I pointed out that a Muslim, according to the Quran is a person who lives the life according to the Quran not just in name only but loves and respects all life otherwise he is not a true Muslim."

That is true.

Regards

The same goes for any Faith. It is our deeds which tell the world who we really are not who we claim to be.

Also, I apologise last time I asked you a question. I was really only teasing but it came out the wrong way, I always consider you my brother.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That’s why I pointed out that a Muslim, according to the Quran is a person who lives the life according to the Quran not just in name only but loves and respects all life otherwise he is not a true Muslim.

The quran does not instruct unconditional "respect" for all life.
It mentions numerous instances/circumstances where the muslim's duty is to kill.

So it comes down to "interpretations" of what those circumstances are exactly.

For example, if muslims execute a man for apostacy, following the process that leads upto execution as layed out by the quran, then you can't exact say that they aren't "real" muslims.

And I wouldn't exactly call killing someone for what they believe (or don't believe) to be very respectfull of "all life".


So, perhaps it is true that the quran calls for "respect for all life". But if it does so, then it has its own definition of either "life" or "respect" or both.

I consider Islam, or most other religions for that matter, to be anything but respectfull for ALL life.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The same goes for any Faith. It is our deeds which tell the world who we really are not who we claim to be.

Nevertheless, knowing someone's religion (and denomination), will give you quite some insight into how they most likely live their life, what their "opinions" are on certain matters, and what actions they are more likely to take in certain situations.

Because beliefs inform actions.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The quran does not instruct unconditional "respect" for all life.
It mentions numerous instances/circumstances where the muslim's duty is to kill.

So it comes down to "interpretations" of what those circumstances are exactly.

For example, if muslims execute a man for apostacy, following the process that leads upto execution as layed out by the quran, then you can't exact say that they aren't "real" muslims.

And I wouldn't exactly call killing someone for what they believe (or don't believe) to be very respectfull of "all life".


So, perhaps it is true that the quran calls for "respect for all life". But if it does so, then it has its own definition of either "life" or "respect" or both.

I consider Islam, or most other religions for that matter, to be anything but respectfull for ALL life.

I believe it does in the sense of the sanctity of life by forbidding killing innocents.

The setting in the time of Muhammad was a lawless Arabian Peninsula dominated by nomadic tribes who killed and fought with each other for domination and control.

There were no laws, no constitution, no police, courts, lawyers, jails, prisons or corrective facilities just the bare desert.

In that setting how was one supposed to deal with serial killers and rapists? Laws had to be anacted that were both harsh to prevent repeat and also as a deterrent.

There was no such thing as killing one for ones belief except from the Meccan side who opposed, oppressed and tortured and killed Muslims from the very beginning for their belief in one God.

The Quran Sura 2:190 forbids attacking first so only self defense was allowed. Only those who attacked Muslims were fought. The rest whether they were Christian, Jew, Sabean or other religion were shown the utmost respect as long as they loved and let live and did not attack Muslims.

The Constitution Of Medina was the very first constitution in the world which granted religious minorities rights to practise their religion.

Law breakers and criminals had to be dealt with according to the laws of that time in a desert so they were admittedly harsh. But today as we have corrective facilities we can take a more humane approach to criminals and try and rehabilitate them.

There is no law in the Quran specifying corporal punishment for apostasy. It is left to God on the Day Of Judgement.

Again, those who betrayed Muslims to join the enemy in their war to commit genocide are fair game as it is a war and if they leave the Muslim side and join with their enemies then they are no longer Muslims but enemies and permission is granted to fight against those who attack or help those who attack and kill Muslims.

But no law exists in the Quran for apostasy.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Nevertheless, knowing someone's religion (and denomination), will give you quite some insight into how they most likely live their life, what their "opinions" are on certain matters, and what actions they are more likely to take in certain situations.

Because beliefs inform actions.

I agree but it depends on whether they follow the Quran directly or through the eyes of a Mulla. There are many decrees that Mullas issue which are in direct opposition to what the Quran teaches.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I agree but it depends on whether they follow the Quran directly or through the eyes of a Mulla. There are many decrees that Mullas issue which are in direct opposition to what the Quran teaches.

In your opinion.

Not in their opinion.

 

[loverofhumanity]

In your opinion.

Not in their opinion.

Yes but the Quran is the Word of God in Islam not a Mulla. The problem of course is they run the religion according to their own machinations and people blindly follow.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Yes I agree but my religion teaches that the spiritual side of man is only good and never does harm to anyone. It is the lower nature, the animalistic nature (ego, lower self) of man, which , if we allow to control us, causes wars and bloodshed etc So if a mans higher nature dominates his life he becomes a saint or true believer while if he allows his lower nature to dominate he becomes a hypocrite and lower than an animal.

A true believer of any Faith i believe, is he who’s higher nature dominates not self and passion. So my religion states that it doesn’t really matter what we call ourselves that we are known by our deeds not our words.

That’s why I pointed out that a Muslim, according to the Quran is a person who lives the life according to the Quran not just in name only but loves and respects all life otherwise he is not a true Muslim.

In the Bible it puts it in a nutshell. It says something like ‘ he who says he loves God but hates his human brother is a liar’. So to me a person can only validate and verify who they claim to be by their deeds not their words.

Fair enough.

 

[Neutral Name]

For Christianity, religiosity has shown a negative correlation with crime. In other words, the more religious someone is, the less likely they'll commit a crime. Islam displays a different picture. There aren't many studies on Muslims, but the ones that do exist show disturbing correlations. There's a slight difference however. Unlike Christianity, where religiosity generally negatively correlates with crime, there are only certain aspects of Islam and religiosity that positively correlate with crime. Out of the three studies analysed here, they found different aspects of Islam are associated with crime.



Baier(2013) found among 16 545 males students in Germany, the Muslim students were more likely to commit crime and the Christian students were less likely. When Muslim students drank infrequently, they found an increase in criminality. When they ran the same test on Christian students, they found no difference. They also found that Muslim men tended to associate with male chauvinism.

Beller et al.(2018a) found among 761 Muslim schoolchildren in Germany, "religious fundamentalism and perceived religious discrimination predict higher delinquency rates."

Finally, Beller et al.,(2018b) collected self report data from 6576 Muslims in 10 countries and found that Muslims that attended Mosques were more likely to endorse extreme violence(e.g. suicide bombing). However, other factors were more likely to reduce support for extreme violence like avidly reading the Quran or high frequency of prayer. edited for correction

There's not much evidence and more research is needed, but there's a clear mechanism difference between the protective factors of religiosity in Islam vs Christianity. Would anyone care to take a guess why and perhaps people have more to add?

I would say that there is a big difference between religiosity and spirituality. I am spiritual but not religious. It is important to me to treat others well and do good in the world. I see people who are persuaded by religion to do "evil" things in the name of their religion.