Why is Islam so dangerous?

[Road Warrior]

You should probably read those passages in context.

The Old Testament is full of similar blood and guts. Slavery, execution for specific crimes like homosexuality, etc.

Examples: Bible Gateway passage: 1 Samuel 15 - New International Version
Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the Lord sent to anoint all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”

Bible Gateway passage: Joshua 6 - New International Version
20 When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. 21 They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

 

[sooda]

Most Muslims just rely on what their clerics tell them about Islam.

By what authority do YOU speak for most Muslims?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Very few hadiths have been authenticated. Most of them came from Persia 200 years after the death of Muhammed. Your understanding of Islam is closer to ISIS than to the majority of Muslims.

The entire new testament comes from decades till centuries after the death of jesus as well.
I don't see how this is relevant.

The fact of the matter is that a great many people consider those hadiths to be very important in their religious experience and beliefs.

I don't give a rat's behind what is "truelly" authenticated (in your opinion) or what isn't.
What matters is what people actually believe.

Just like I don't give a rat's behind what shariah law is "truelly" all about (in your opinion) or not.
What matters is how it is actually implemented in practice.

 

[sooda]

The entire new testament comes from decades till centuries after the death of jesus as well.
I don't see how this is relevant.

The fact of the matter is that a great many people consider those hadiths to be very important in their religious experience and beliefs.

I don't give a rat's behind what is "truelly" authenticated (in your opinion) or what isn't.
What matters is what people actually believe.

Just like I don't give a rat's behind what shariah law is "truelly" all about (in your opinion) or not.
What matters is how it is actually implemented in practice.

I don't authenticate hadiiths.. There were over 60,000 of them.

 

[Raymann]

Yeah, you are pretty much interpreting it wrong.

Not according to this article:
The most dangerous verse in the Quran

Say to those who have disbelieved [that] if they cease, what has previously occurred will be forgiven for them. But if they return [to hostility] - then the precedent of the former [rebellious] peoples has already taken place. [8:38]

Those who have disbelieved were Christians.
Why do they have to be forced out of their religion?
Their only crime was to believe in Jesus, what is wrong with that?
What hostility is this verse talking about?
Believing in Jesus is not committing any hostility.
Use your brain.

The expedition of Tabuk was preceded by the battle of Mu’tah which began when the emissary of the Prophet was assassinated while delivering a letter to a Roman ally.

How is it that you happen to forget to mention that the messenger who delivered the letter enter into the Byzantine's territory and suggested to the Byzantines they should worship Allah, the only real God?
The problem is that the Byzantines official religion at the time was Christianity and just like in Islam Christianity had a thing called BLASPHEMY.
Suggesting to the Byzantines that they were worshiping a false God (Jesus) was actually committing the crime of blasphemy and the penalty was death.
This is the reason the Muslims attacked the Byzantines even when THEY WERE NEVER ATTACKED, violating one of the most sacred rules of Islam and setting a bad precedent for the future.
Today groups like ISIS take advantage of this bad example.

God sent us Quran as a divine book. Not hadiths. Hadiths are unreliable to say the least. It is based on Chinese whispers.

Again, it is in the Islamic culture to use Hadith and the Terrorists know which ones to use.

Those retards of ISIS may call themselves the real Muslims and win an argument through brute force and threat, but against voice of reason and wisdom, they will lose every single time.

Winning with the voice of reason and wisdom in Islamic countries?
Are you serious?

if you blame the teachings of the sacred text of a religion and want to get rid of it, accusing it of being violent; The Bible and the Torah will have to go before the Quran.

I give you that, I haven't compared the level of violence in them.
The thing is that Jews and Christians somehow manage to ignore the violent passages better than Muslims.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But let me tell you something, if you blame the teachings of the sacred text of a religion and want to get rid of it, accusing it of being violent; The Bible and the Torah will have to go before the Quran.

Wouldn't mind that either.

Well, scratch that... I would actually mind the books themselves disappearing.
I would mind the religions being erased from collective memory, as they clearly are a very important part of our collective cultural heritage.

What I actually wouldn't mind, is for all those religious believers to stop taking their religion so bloody seriously.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Most Muslims just rely on what their clerics tell them about Islam.

I think the same goes for theists in general.

 

[sooda]

Not according to this article:
The most dangerous verse in the Quran

Those who have disbelieved were Christians.
Why do they have to be forced out of their religion?
Their only crime was to believe in Jesus, what is wrong with that?
What hostility is this verse talking about?
Believing in Jesus is not committing any hostility.
Use your brain.
How is it that you happen to forget to mention that the messenger who delivered the letter enter into the Byzantine's territory and suggested to the Byzantines they should worship Allah, the only real God?
The problem is that the Byzantines official religion at the time was Christianity and just like in Islam Christianity had a thing called BLASPHEMY.
Suggesting to the Byzantines that they were worshiping a false God (Jesus) was actually committing the crime of blasphemy and the penalty was death.
This is the reason the Muslims attacked the Byzantines even when THEY WERE NEVER ATTACKED, violating one of the most sacred rules of Islam and setting a bad precedent for the future.
Today groups like ISIS take advantage of this bad example.
Again, it is in the Islamic culture to use Hadith and the Terrorists know which ones to use.
Winning with the voice of reason and wisdom in Islamic countries?
Are you serious?

I give you that, I haven't compared the level of violence in them.
The thing is that Jews and Christians somehow manage to ignore the violent passages better than Muslims.

200,000? LOLOL.. What a joke. American Thinker is such a dumb rag.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't authenticate hadiiths.. There were over 60,000 of them.

Which is just as irrelevant.

Also, the 'your' in "(in your opinion)" that I added there, isn't necessarily about you... it is about anyone who wishes to express their opinion / beliefs about them.

It's basically a no true scottsman.
Every christian denomination thinks THEY have the correct "interpretation" or "understanding" or "revelation" and that ALL the others got it wrong.

Islamic denominations aren't any different.
You say that hadith isn't "relevant" because it's not "authenticated". Cool.
For a great many muslims though, they are very relevant. So they disagree with you.

You obviously think you are correct. But they think the same.

And I'm just an external bystander watching you argue about it - which to me seems very similar to fighting a war using action figures.

So I don't care what "true islam" is.
I only care about how it is being practiced - because it's the actual practice that has effects on society and other people. The rest is not relevant for me.

I don't care about Islam - the religion, any more then I care about the Norse gods.
But I do care about people and how they behave and how their behaviour affects society.


And what I see is that Islam seems to have a FAR larger share of fundamentalists as opposed to a religion like christianity for example.

I also note that the radicals in Islam are, in general, a lot more dangerous and violent then their christian counterparts. Christians today, for example, don't have a habbit or tendency to form militia's armed to the teeth to go on killing sprees and organize brutal terrorist attacks on innocent bystanders.

Let's not pretend as if this isn't a problem in the islamic culture.
Let's not pretend as if when we see on the news that some bomb exploded somewhere in a public space, that "muslim terrorism" isn't the very first thing on our minds. Let's also not pretend that more often then not, that first thought will also be correct.
Let's not pretend that these militia's aren't motivated by their islamic religious beliefs.
Let's not pretend that suicide bombers religiously believe that as islamic martyrs, a special place of glory is reserved for them in paradise where they will be rewarded for their "great courage" and "righteous action".


Please, let's not pretend.

 

[Mark Sinista]

Yeah Christians ignore the violent laws today but don't tell me it happened overnight.

There are only 15 countries that implement Sharia Law fully and partly. There are around 50 muslim majority countries, and the rest represent the majority. The other countries live without Sharia Law just fine.

l live in a Muslim country and we are living with other religions just fine. I have friends and co-workers of other religions and beliefs. We all get vacations on our religious festive days. We join them too. Extremists are not taken kindly by the law here. Women are not oppressed here to follow any Sharia rules. They live freely as they see fit.

Yes many of the muslims follow hadiths. But tell me the reality of it. They follow those mainly to know how to pray, how to fast, how to dress, what's forbidden to eat, how to go by daily days in general. When I talk with hadith followers, they don't even know about the violent things in them nor do they follow them, nor do they preach them. They don't even know about the so called violent verses of the Quran.

Things are changing gradually on Sharia Law imposed countries too. People are getting vocal about this more and more. Change will come.

The extremism and terrorism are hated by the majority of the Muslims. They too have the risk of suffering because of those terrorists as much as the west do. The forming of terrorists didn't rely solely on the religious factors. There are other much complex factors in play.

Now back to the original topic, "Why Islam is so dangerous?" So dangerous that the question of inevitable war against Islam is raised.

We have established that the core teachings of Islam doesn't teach us violence. Also, the terrorists are only a minority and the majority only want to live in peace.

So why the the hate against Muslims in general? If you start war against us, how's that fair? by proposing the idea you are leaning towards the extremist spectrum yourselves.

I made my point and after this nothing I can say that can change your minds if not already. I respect other religions and didn't degrade them in any of my post. I expect to be shown the same respect. The debate will never end as I said in my first post. Nothing we say here is gonna change that much anyway. I leave my knowledge here for the people and their understanding.

 

[Shad]

The US and UK made some idiotic moves in the ME in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s.... Its a miracle that we didn't drive them all into the arms of the Soviets..

The US drove people into the arms of the religious fanatics while trying to fight left-leaning influence.

Arabs by nature are not communists.. they are merchant and traders... capitalists.

Look up the Egyptian Revolutionary Command Council.

 

[Shad]

certainly not spying, assassinating and blowing themselves up and kill innocents. This is pointing towards tactics of warfare.

At-Tabari and other commentators

Hadiths are unreliable to say the least. It is based on Chinese whispers.

This is hilarious cherry picking.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

What is Shariah?

I understand your point although is not the way I personally understand it.
My belief has been that Shariah is one (the second part of your description), the whole set of rules (legal stuff, family, everyday rules, etc).
So my understanding is that to be a Muslim you have to believe in all of Shariah rules (the ones from the scriptures)
Maybe you don't have to believe or accept the human additions to it.
So at the end and based on the concept that Shariah is ONE big set of rules then I'm inclined to believe that Shariah cannot be separated from Islam, they are one and the same.
If you don't follow Shariah then you're not a real Muslim.

If one believes Shariah to be the whole shebang as you have set it out, and as certainly quite a few Muslims believe, then, yes, the two cannot be separated. But not all Muslims believe that.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

That sounds a little scary.

How so?

 

[sooda]

The US drove people into the arms of the religious fanatics while trying to fight left-leaning influence.



Look up the Egyptian Revolutionary Command Council.

Left leaning influences where?

 

[Raymann]

200,000? LOLOL.. What a joke. American Thinker is such a dumb rag.

Who's is the dumb rag?
The Internet Site (American Thinker) or the author of the article?
For your information, he didn't invent the figure "200,000".
The info is available with little effort:
Take a look:
Historiography[edit]
According to al-Waqidi and Ibn Ishaq, the Muslims were informed that 100,000[6] or 200,000[7] enemy troops were encamped at Balqa'.[6][19] Consequently, modern historians refute this stating the figure to be exaggerated.[8][9][10] According to Walter Emil Kaegi, professor of Byzantine history at the University of Chicago, the size of the entire Byzantine army during the 7th century might have totaled 100,000, possibly even half this number.[20] While the Byzantine forces at Mu'tah are unlikely to have numbered more than 10,000.[a][11]

Battle of Mu'tah

Are you planning on apologizing to this gentleman?
That was very rude on your part.

Yeah, you are pretty much interpreting it wrong

I was expecting some kind of rebuttal after I provided good reason to believe my interpretations are the correct ones.
Is it that easy to prove the Quran passages are violent?
Go figure!

 

[sooda]

Who's is the dumb rag?
The Internet Site (American Thinker) or the author of the article?
For your information, he didn't invent the figure "200,000".
The info is available with little effort:
Take a look:
Historiography[edit]
According to al-Waqidi and Ibn Ishaq, the Muslims were informed that 100,000[6] or 200,000[7] enemy troops were encamped at Balqa'.[6][19] Consequently, modern historians refute this stating the figure to be exaggerated.[8][9][10] According to Walter Emil Kaegi, professor of Byzantine history at the University of Chicago, the size of the entire Byzantine army during the 7th century might have totaled 100,000, possibly even half this number.[20] While the Byzantine forces at Mu'tah are unlikely to have numbered more than 10,000.[a][11]

Battle of Mu'tah

Are you planning on apologizing to this gentleman?
That was very rude on your part.

I was expecting some kind of rebuttal after I provided good reason to believe my interpretations are the correct ones.
Is it that easy to prove the Quran passages are violent?
Go figure!

I'm saying the number are grossly exaggerated just as they are in the Old Testament.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

God sent us Quran as a divine book. Not hadiths. Hadiths are unreliable to say the least. It is based on Chinese whispers. Many of them have been fabricated by the enemies of Islam or changed over time.

Do you include the hadiths considered 'sahih' in this?

 

[Shad]

Left leaning influences where?

Nassar. The Kurd rebels are socialist, The Shah purged socialists only to need them against the religious. Afghanistan. The Ba'ath Party started as a socialist party. Look up Pan-Arabism

 

[sooda]

Nassar. The Kurd rebels are socialist, The Shah purged socialists only to need them against the religious. Afghanistan. The Ba'ath Party started as a socialist party. Look up Pan-Arabism

Nasser wanted to build the Aswan Dam and Eisenhower agreed to finance it.. After the Lavon Affair, Eisenhower withdrew his offer driving Nasser into the arms of the Soviets and causing the Suez Crisis.

I remember it like it was yesterday. The Shia rioted in Arabia.