Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"O Muslims, Islam was never for a day the religion of peace. Islam is the religion of war," he said, calling for mass mobilisation on the battlefield."
"O Muslims, Islam was never for a day the religion of peace. Islam is the religion of war," he said, calling for mass mobilisation on the battlefield."
I don't really understand the premise of the thread? If you're asking whether or not we have a figure head in Islam, we haven't since the end of the last Caliphate about 100 years ago. Currently we have recognized scholars whom come from reputable institutions that form a consensus (Ijma) on certain issues.
One of these consensus's by our scholars has been that the Caliphate of Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is invalid from the perspective of Shari'a and that therefore the actions and pronouncements coming from his group only speak for his group, and not the main body of Muslims.
And on another note, our religion can best be described as the religion of submittance. The definition of a Muslim is one who submit to the will of Allah (swt) and holds him to be the one true God, with no partners and that Muhammad (saw) is his messenger.
The point is that often we hear Islam is w religion of peace.
I'm not all Muslims feel that way. We also here that is one does not have one spokesperson, yet obviously many Muslims follow certain leaders.
As such, who are we to believe?
As a Muslim I have been consistently told to question all things and not believe any living leader without verifying what he says. We are to verify the truth of what every living person says on our own and through independent sources.
All of us Muslims and non-Muslims have the obligation to verify the truth of all things and not be blind followers of any living person.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,916,433 times
Reputation: 4561
So Woodrow, why are there so many Muslims who do not adhere to that.
I think most people if they were to rank religions based on the extremes would put Muslims first, then Christians, Jews, and way down the list Buddhist, Hindu, Sikhs and the rest. I'm pretty sure Shinto and Mormon would not even register.
There's a reason for that, and one has to look at the teachings of the faith and conclude that the base teachings are at least part to blame.
So Woodrow, why are there so many Muslims who do not adhere to that.
I think most people if they were to rank religions based on the extremes would put Muslims first, then Christians, Jews, and way down the list Buddhist, Hindu, Sikhs and the rest. I'm pretty sure Shinto and Mormon would not even register.
There's a reason for that, and one has to look at the teachings of the faith and conclude that the base teachings are at least part to blame.
So many Muslims? Please provide statistics because as far as I understand, the number of active members of Islamic terrorist organizations doesn't even encompass 1% of our Ummah.
Secondly, these groups have not arisen from Islamic teachings or historical precedents. Rather these groups have strong *political* qualms and use our religion to *justify* their actions, namely murdering civilians because they are a member of a nation that has committed war/aggression against Muslims, that they are guilty by default and association. Unfortunately this line of reasoning could not be more unIslamic as our Prophet (saw) advised the Muslims that if they win a battle/war that they should not even harm the trees of where they conquered, none the less civilians and he exhibited such behavior upon his conquering of Mecca.
Now as far as what the world sees as extreme... That is up to how the media wants to paint it. I think a mass movement of European and non-native Jews to Palestine coming and taking over Palestine within a matter of less than 50 years at the detriment of the native population is quite extreme. Especially when it was performed and supported at the behest of fulfilling some biblical prophecy. I think Buhddist extremists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide of Muslims in Burma is quite extreme. I think Hindus raping and burning alive Muslims in Gojarat, India is quite extreme. I also think *forcing* Middle Eastern countries to accept secular-democracy by threatening either invasion or supporting internal coups is extreme. I think Stalin *literally* wiping out nearly 20 million Muslims from Central Asia in the name of atheist-communism is quite extreme. I think the Chinese forcing Muslims in western China to abandon Ramadan, cut their beards and banning wearing hijab is quite extreme.
So Woodrow, why are there so many Muslims who do not adhere to that.
I think most people if they were to rank religions based on the extremes would put Muslims first, then Christians, Jews, and way down the list Buddhist, Hindu, Sikhs and the rest. I'm pretty sure Shinto and Mormon would not even register.
There's a reason for that, and one has to look at the teachings of the faith and conclude that the base teachings are at least part to blame.
while I agree with you that is how most people would rank religions, but is that based upon fact or media influence?
Sikhs have a very high preponderance for violence, especially in regards to "honor killings"
As these religions differ considerably, it seems that terrorism has factors other than religion involved. Not a one of the dominate religions endorse terrorism, but all have terrorist group claiming to be adherents of them
World wide there are quite a few Terrorist organizations that claim to be Christian
As these religions differ considerably, it seems that terrorism has factors other than religion involved. Not a one of the dominate religions endorse terrorism, but all have terrorist group claiming to be adherents of them
World wide there are quite a few Terrorist organizations that claim to be Christian
The Tamils were more political than anything, and to suggest they were more radical than al Queda from which ISIS is an offshoot from?
Regardless of the fact that there are atrocities such as honor killings perpetrated by other groups, the mass amount of violence that is done by Muslim groups, often in the name of Islam, far exceeds that of any other group. To deny that is just denying the obvious.
The bigger question is what will Muslims do about it? By denying or minimizing its existence, all Muslims who do so, are in fact perpetuating the problem.
The Tamils were more political than anything, and to suggest they were more radical than al Queda from which ISIS is an offshoot from?
Regardless of the fact that there are atrocities such as honor killings perpetrated by other groups, the mass amount of violence that is done by Muslim groups, often in the name of Islam, far exceeds that of any other group. To deny that is just denying the obvious.
The bigger question is what will Muslims do about it? By denying or minimizing its existence, all Muslims who do so, are in fact perpetuating the problem.
I answered your inquiry directly. Muslims are currently fighting ISIS on the ground, and Muslim nation-state actors are cracking down on terrorist groups. Islamic scholars have condemned terrorism the world over (unto which I've provided a multitude of links for in other threads) and nearly every reputable scholar in the world signed a letter condemning the actions of ISIS.
What else do you want?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
