Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Bin Laden, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, do you really need verifiable citations of military operations, fundings, arms deals, and bad alliances?
-
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!
Your opinion please about Islam.
- Thread starter jeager106
- Start date
Post those sources please.
I'm interesting in reading those.
I DOUBT anyone has a personal jihad against Islam.
It's RADICAL Islam.
You did read my posts about RADICAL, not ALL Islam.
I'm sure those that post negativism about Islam refer ONLY to RADICAL...........................get it????????????
Can't do it can ya?
So I thought.
Opinions are like the anal orifice.
Everyone has one.
Some are more willing to expose said orifice than others.
arthra
Baha'i
As a Baha'i I accept the Qur'an as an "authentic repository of the Word of God" and I accept Muhammad as a Prophet and Manifestation of God, beyond that however over the past thirteen centuries or so there has been twists and turns and interpretations added and institutions established that have not necessarily represented the original teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad. I do not believe that attacking unarmed civilians was part of the original practices of Islam... Defensive warfare was permitted in the early history but not assaulting non-combatants. The brand of terrorism that has been practiced in recent years is not part of Islam ... it is terrorism. Most religions over time have had some very poor examples and models accrued over the centuries based on ignorance and influenced by those who seek to exploit religion for their own purposes. The international community needs to respond to the issues at hand and support measures that defend innocent people.
@Mestemia
Thanks.
yaaaaawn....................................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Noting to do with today's terrorism.
McBell
Unbound
I agree it is a long mostly boring read.
However, it does provide a basic outline of US involvement in the Middle East since WWII
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
So you want people to think you can't do a little multiplication? That you are oblivious to terrorists of other ideologies? Did you not hear when the P-IRA, a group of violent Catholics, was planting bombs in trash cans in London? The Nazis, KKK, Eastern Lightning, and LRA, all of them Christian, all of them violent.
Do you really enjoy pointing the finger at Islam while the occasional Christian in America assaults, or sometimes kills, an atheist because they are an atheist? Or all those who believe it is their right to bully and discriminate based on religious grounds? If you're going to lump all of Islam in such a way, and put such a negative focus and emphasis on the radical outliers who are insignificant in the long run, then you must also do this with your own religion. Afterall, your religion has a group who is petty enough to protest the relaunch of the Muppets because they apparently watched/remembered it with rose-tinted purity filter glasses.
@Shadow Wolf et al.
Those other groups for the most part aren't worldwide and don't mass murder people by
bombing innocents or fly hi-jacked passenger jets into tall building or blow themselves up
while committing mass murder or plant bombs in trash cans to kill innocents or blow up
up the Boston marathon or..................................
"your religion has a group"
MY religion?
You know my religion?
How perceptive you are.
NOT!
I've been pretty darned clear about RADICAL Islam,
not Islam, the real religion of peace.
My sig line says "learning more about Jehovah" and does not mean I'm a member
of ANY religious group though I feel I'm a Christian.
So just for you I'll expose my religion.
Christian and baptized in a Church of Christ.
So was my youngest son, now 17.
My departed and beloved uncle was a Deacon in said church.
Dunked don'cha'know.
Jehovah is reputed to be God's proper name according to several sources.
Comments?
I'm here hoping to learn more about God (Jehovah).
Those other groups for the most part aren't worldwide and don't mass murder people by
bombing innocents or fly hi-jacked passenger jets into tall building or blow themselves up
while committing mass murder or plant bombs in trash cans to kill innocents or blow up
up the Boston marathon or..................................
"your religion has a group"
MY religion?
You know my religion?
How perceptive you are.
NOT!
I've been pretty darned clear about RADICAL Islam,
not Islam, the real religion of peace.
My sig line says "learning more about Jehovah" and does not mean I'm a member
of ANY religious group though I feel I'm a Christian.
So just for you I'll expose my religion.
Christian and baptized in a Church of Christ.
So was my youngest son, now 17.
My departed and beloved uncle was a Deacon in said church.
Dunked don'cha'know.
Jehovah is reputed to be God's proper name according to several sources.
Comments?
I'm here hoping to learn more about God (Jehovah).
Last edited:
Which is something that Usonian people tend to be woefully ignorant about. @jeager106
Sorry jeags, but your ignorance on this subject is really bad. Not worse than most people around here. But still.
The USA, a Christian nation, has caused far more damage in the Muslim world than a hundred 9/11s. People preferring not to know about it doesn't mean that the Muslims are ignorant about it. I see your attitude towards this essentially the same as the conservative Muslims who think it's all the USA's fault and nothing to do with Islam.
Tom
Thanks Tom.
Educational and enlightening post.
I'm absolutely sure that the U.S. and Great Britain have been raping the Middle East for quite a long
time.
I do know just a bit about history but not my strong suit.
My two degrees are in the science fields.
That said the rulers of the middle east made that rape easy while profiting mightily.
No excuses however.
European whites raped the Native Americans, my ancestors.
Indeed. Catholics certainly have no room to talk.
Tumah
Veteran Member
I'll have to get back to you on that. Its common knowledge to the older folk here, assuming I'm not confusing it with another war. But I'll try to get some information on it. Meanwhile, you can find some sites that speak about the Grand Mufti touring the lager.
In retrospect, I find it funny that separation between religion and politics has ever become a goal for anyone.
Of course religious beliefs will have political consequences. How could they not?
After all, politics are supposed to be about deciding what groups of people who do not always agree should do on each other's behalf, while religion is supposed to be a significant part of how and why people want to do things generally.
Far as I can tell, the idea that such a separation is possible - let alone a goal worth pursuing - has only reached any popularity because so many people are so keenly aware of serious instances of abusive, destructive beliefs reaching positions of significant political power.
To some extent that is mistaking the disease for the typical (or at least healthy) specimen. But it is also a sobering call to warn us all of how frequently entirely unreasonable beliefs have been given way too much political power and way too little social challenge.
Pretty good questions. I fear the answers may be very disappointing, though.
In everyday life, much of what was supposed to be religious practice ends up being creative use of selective perception and other psychological and sociological phenomena in order to deal with the lack of logical substance to scriptures and religious directives. Or to put it in another way: if faced with the need to choose, people will very often accept logical incoherence if that is the price to be paid for being accepted by the community. And very often it is indeed.
I have come to wonder about that in recent years.
At this point in time I no longer believe that, generally speaking, the kind of sense that Islam makes for Muslims is very comparable to even the sense that Christianity makes for Christians. Muslim apologists sometimes say that Islam is a complete way of life, and I have come to agree with that, albeit coming to entirely different conclusions from that.
In a nutshell, it is dangerous to assume that Muslim societies are comparable to other societies. I strongly suspect that the constant and largely unchallenged call for perceiving and defining pretty much everything as a function of a presumed Creator God has seriously damaged the ability of Muslim societies to think logically.
Just a few short years ago I would berate myself for even considering such a judgement. But I can't in good faith pretend not to have learned what I did learn since, scary as it is.
A really great exchange here between you and idav...
Your question wasn't directed at me, but I'm gonna toss in my two cents anyway: Agreed that "religion isn't a singular thing". But if we were to construct a Venn diagram of the world's most popular religions, we would find some overlapping ideas, so I don't think it's completely inappropriate to discuss "religion" as a whole.
Religion *tends* to foster some degree of dogmatic thinking. Dogmatic thinking is the root of many of today's evils.
Religion *tends* to lag behind human advances. I would argue that our best moral and ethical thinking has improved over time, and many of the major religions' moral compasses are really outdated.
Is it the religion or religious leaders who are the real cause of violence?
That can and does apply to any religion. But that does not mean the religion is violent.
But doesn't the media love to rush to condemn any religion as associated with terrorism????
Does that mean we shouldn't distinguish in our own minds the acts of fanatics from the real teachings? If one knows the Quran well, then one knows nowhere is violence taught only self defence but then again if one does not read about Buddha and the Dhamma they would also believe Buddhists are terrorists too.
That violent fanatics exist in all Faiths is a proven fact.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/in...anned-time-story-the-face-of-buddhist-terror/
That can and does apply to any religion. But that does not mean the religion is violent.
But doesn't the media love to rush to condemn any religion as associated with terrorism????
Does that mean we shouldn't distinguish in our own minds the acts of fanatics from the real teachings? If one knows the Quran well, then one knows nowhere is violence taught only self defence but then again if one does not read about Buddha and the Dhamma they would also believe Buddhists are terrorists too.
That violent fanatics exist in all Faiths is a proven fact.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/in...anned-time-story-the-face-of-buddhist-terror/
In the case of Islam, I would say that it is the religion itself, although that does not forgive the leaders. The Qur'an promotes way too much of a "us vs them" mentaility and is way too tied to tribal societies morality for anyone's good.
Does it?
Violence made consistently with religious justification of a certain faith and without significant internal challenge does mean that the religion is violent.
Actually no, it does not. At least I have not seen any evidence pointing to that.
If anything, there is a taboo against making such an attempt, even when it is justified.
Of course not.
Nor should we refrain from learning how much leeway well-meaning but ultimately misinformed people often give to certain doctrines.
Uh, no. That is entirely wrong.
No. That is actually a lie.
The URL is slightly but significantly wrong. It is actually https://www.colombotelegraph.com/in...anned-time-story-the-face-of-buddhist-terror/
And boy, is it misleading. Even that article itself points out that the violence is two-way. That violence and extremisms are disastrous, but I find it dishonest to attempt to present Sri Lanka's situation as some sort of "Buddhist equivalent" to the dangers of Islam.