Why do fanatical Muslims feel the need to help out Allah with his punishments on the infidels and apostates?

[Woodrow LI]

Originally Posted by TheProcess

Saudi Arabia will condemn terrorism. They are still part of the terrorism problem as they spread fundie Islam around the world, which is a breeding ground for terrorism.

I agree the al-Saud family has been responsible for funding Wahabbi'ism. In the 1800s the al-Saud family was exiled from the Arab Nations as heretics, because of their Wahabbi beliefs.

But came back in force and in 1929 conqured Hejaz and Najd and formed the KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) the almost immediate discovery of oil and the formation of Aramoco gave them the wealth to hold the control and the wealth to spread Wahabbi'ism. Many of us feel they are occupying Hejaz illegally and they have no justifiable claim to occupy Mecca and Medina.

I do not know any Muslims that would accept financial assistance from the al-Saud family as we believe they are financing heresy.

Originally Posted by TheProcess

There was a Muslim on here not long ago--if I remember correctly--that was against "terrorism". But they actually supported the Islamist terror group Hamas, and also supported waging aggressive jihad against unbelievers if a proper caliph is in place. (although at least they were honest enough to admit that jihad is really like that.)

I do not think Hamas qualifies as a religous terrorist group. They are a political organizationthat wants to reclaim the land their parents and grandparents were forcebly evicted from in 1947.

Originally Posted by TheProcess

Mere condemnations of "terrorism" don't necessarily mean that much.

true, but there is no organization called Islam. Each Muslim is independent. We do not join a group called Islam, we perform an act of worship called Islam. No person or group represents Islam. Each of us speaks only for our self

Originally Posted by TheProcess

Islam has killed and enslaved millions of people historically. The Muslim world--as far I can see--has done next to nothing to face up to the crimes of its religion.

there is no organized Muslim world. We have no central organization. The only times Muslims are united is when there is a Caliph appointed by God(swt) that will not happen again and jesus returns and with the Mehdi will establish the next and final Caliphate.

Originally Posted by TheProcess

Traditional Islam is indeed "demonic" i.e. extremely evil with massive blood on its hands.

You have to deal in terms of individuals. There have been Muslims that committed atrocities. They did so because they were evil, not because they practiced Islam.

Originally Posted by TheProcess

We must be watching different media. I normally see the media defending Islam. They hardly ever allow critical voices to speak.

Perceptions differ depending on one's posistion

Originally Posted by TheProcess

As I just mentioned: Traditional Islam is indeed "demonic" i.e. extremely evil with massive blood on its hands.

Define "Traditional" Islam

Originally Posted by TheProcess

There is nothing wrong with "demonizing" Islam if it really is evil.

You can demonize individuals that do evil. But that is no cause to demonize all people that perform Islam.

[Continuum]

Originally Posted by Woodrow LI

You can demonize individuals that do evil. But that is no cause to demonize all people that perform Islam.

Generally most people has the tendency* to generalize, i.e. the generalization fallacy. [* on one hand, it has survival values in certain circumstances, therefore necessary, therefore need to be applied appropriately ]
e.g.

1. x is a thief
2. x is Y color
3. Ys are thieves. [reads ALL]

The above is bad logic and lousy critical thinking.
I don't think many who generalize often mean to imply their statement refer to ALL, they are just lazy thinkers.
Note how Trump got caught with 'Mexicans are rapists' when he spoke too fast without applying critical thinking and qualified his statement carefully.

I used to be 'rapped' for committing such a fallacy when I first started with philosophy where LOGIC and critical thinking are very important values. Thereafter, I try to be very cautious to avoid such a fallacy and be mindful of it when it happens anywhere.

Therefore when I read,
"There is nothing wrong with "demonizing" Islam if it really is evil."
I am quite sure it does not mean the 'whole of Islam' and refer to ALL Muslims.

As I have often taken the trouble to qualify, I will take the above statement as;
"There is nothing wrong with "demonizing" Islam [in part] if it really has some evil-laden elements, that had catalyzed SOME evil-prone Muslims to commit evil"
Then I will provide sufficient proofs to the above statement which I had in my various postings.

[Woodrow LI]

Originally Posted by Continuum

Generally most people has the tendency* to generalize, i.e. the generalization fallacy. [* on one hand, it has survival values in certain circumstances, therefore necessary, therefore need to be applied appropriately ]
e.g.

1. x is a thief
2. x is Y color
3. Ys are thieves. [reads ALL]

The above is bad logic and lousy critical thinking.
I don't think many who generalize often mean to imply their statement refer to ALL, they are just lazy thinkers.
Note how Trump got caught with 'Mexicans are rapists' when he spoke too fast without applying critical thinking and qualified his statement carefully.

I used to be 'rapped' for committing such a fallacy when I first started with philosophy where LOGIC and critical thinking are very important values. Thereafter, I try to be very cautious to avoid such a fallacy and be mindful of it when it happens anywhere.

Therefore when I read,
"There is nothing wrong with "demonizing" Islam if it really is evil."
I am quite sure it does not mean the 'whole of Islam' and refer to ALL Muslims.

As I have often taken the trouble to qualify, I will take the above statement as;
"There is nothing wrong with "demonizing" Islam [in part] if it really has some evil-laden elements, that had catalyzed SOME evil-prone Muslims to commit evil"
Then I will provide sufficient proofs to the above statement which I had in my various postings.

Rhat is all fine. but will be based upon how one defines Islam. Even among Muslims there is considerable difference in how we define it.

The direct translation of Islam is "Performing the action of submitting to Allah(swt)"

With all the flavors we come in. It may be noticiale we vary widely in how we do that.

Those of us that claim to practice Islam form a very wide bandwidth in the Islam spectrum
.
The wide width of the Islam spectrum runs from those who view all adherents of a Monotheistic religion as performing Islam to Only the adherents of a specific madhab perform Islam.

[Continuum]

Originally Posted by Woodrow LI

That is all fine. but will be based upon how one defines Islam. Even among Muslims there is considerable difference in how we define it.

The direct translation of Islam is "Performing the action of submitting to Allah(swt)"

With all the flavors we come in. It may be noticiale we vary widely in how we do that.

Those of us that claim to practice Islam form a very wide bandwidth in the Islam spectrum
.
The wide width of the Islam spectrum runs from those who view all adherents of a Monotheistic religion as performing Islam to Only the adherents of a specific madhab perform Islam.

Principle of Substance versus Form
You are emphasizing too much on the Form rather that the Substance. As I mentioned somewhere, there is the principle of Substance versus Form in reality and human nature.

Analogy 1:
In terms of Energy necessary to sustain life, there is its Substance and the Forms.
The Substance and ultimate of the Energy business within a human organism is to get the various nutrients to the cells.
The penultimate to this core system is a whole lot of generic sub-systems that is common to ALL human beings, e.g. the digestive system, etc.
As to its forms, there are a wide variety of how food are obtained, grown, prepared and eaten that vary with locations, ethnicity, etc.
Thus when we understand all the mechanics of the Energy-Digestive System we can fit in whatever has to do with food and nutrition into the generic model.
For example, we can easily understand the ultimate purpose of fasting and how it fit into the substance of the human nutrition-energy system and optimal health. Those who do not understand will be gluttons after each fasting and end up heavier [more obese] than before they started fasting.

Analogy 2:
It is the same for the Substance and Form regarding sex, of which the ultimate [the substance] is to get the sperm to meet up with ovum.
There are many other generic sub-systems that support the main [substance] of the consummation of sex.
However as for the Forms there is a great diversity of activities but their ultimate is to lead to the substance of getting the sperm to consolidate with the ovum.
Personal grooming may seem independent but actually that is a form of activity that is leading to the consummation of sex.
There could be hundreds and thousand of human activities in various forms which are ultimately directed to its ultimate purpose.

There are many other human systems that has its substance [ultimate purpose] with a wide variety of forms.

The Spiritual-Religio System in Humans
One of the main human system is the Spiritual-Religio system which has generic 'substance' within all human beings.
The different types of spirituality and religions are merely various forms with its own variety of forms.

Islam is thus merely one of the forms that support the spiritual-religion system of humans. Within Islam there are sub-forms, i.e. different sects, etc. The problem with many Muslims is they are brainwashed to think Islam is the superior and perfect religion for mankind.

Reality is Islam is merely a form of the spiritual-religion system of human beings and Islam is one of the inferior forms as compared to other forms such as those from the Eastern religions and spirituality. This can be easily proven and justified by the terrible evils associated with SOME Muslims being catalyzed directly by SOME evil laden verses in its holy texts.
In contrast, there is no* such evil manifestation directly from the holy texts in other existing main religions. * If any, rare & not critical, or misinterpreted.
Islam is also very much weaker in other spiritual criteria, e.g. development of Spiritual Quotient in real neural terms, Morality Quotient, Wisdom Quotient.

If one understand Islam as "Performing the action of submitting to Allah(swt)", which is a form and without fitting it within the generic human Spiritual-Religio system [substance], then one is like to be lost in their spiritual journey.

It is the failure* of SOME [or most] Muslims in understanding where Islam stand in relation to the generic spiritual-religio system within humans that trigger them [SOME] to commit terrible evils in the name of the religion, the prophet and God. * Why? - there is a good reason for it.

[TheProcess]

Originally Posted by Woodrow LI

I do not think Hamas qualifies as a religous terrorist group. They are a political organizationthat wants to reclaim the land their parents and grandparents were forcebly evicted from in 1947.

"The Islamic Resistance Movement draws its guidelines from Islam; derives from it its thinking, interpretations and views about existence, life and humanity; refers back to it for its conduct; and is inspired by it in whatever step it takes."

"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a world organization, the largest Islamic Movement in the modern era."


"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. No Arab country nor the aggregate of all Arab countries, and no Arab King or President nor all of them in the aggregate, have that right, nor has that right any organization or the aggregate of all organizations, be they Palestinian or Arab, because Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day of Resurrection. Who can presume to speak for all Islamic Generations to the Day of Resurrection? This is the status [of the land] in Islamic Shari’a, and it is similar to all lands conquered by Islam by force, and made thereby Waqf lands upon their conquest, for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection."


Palestine Center - The Charter of the Hamas




So when Muslims come and steal your land, they then own it forever under their religious law. That is their justification.

Notice that it wouldn't just apply to Israel but also they would want to take back Spain for example because Muslims conquered part of it in the past.

So yes, I would disagree with you. It's very much "religious terror" where Islam and "jihad" are central to it.

[TheProcess]

Originally Posted by Woodrow LI

there is no organized Muslim world. We have no central organization. The only times Muslims are united is when there is a Caliph appointed by God(swt) that will not happen again and jesus returns and with the Mehdi will establish the next and final Caliphate.

It seems the Muslim world can organize when they want to:



quoting:

Needed: A New Church Policy toward Islam [Pt. 2] - Crisis Magazine


"The larger context is that Islam wants to shut down any speech critical of Islam in any way. By “Islam,” I don’t mean every Muslim in the world. But how about the OIC—the Organization of Islamic Cooperation? Comprised of fifty-seven Muslim-majority nations and the Palestinian Authority, it’s the largest Islamic body in the world and also the largest bloc at the UN. What’s the chief project of the OIC? According to one observer, “For more than a decade, ‘the collective voice of the Muslim world’ has spread the belief that any insult directed against the Muslim faith or its prophet demands absolute suppression.” The OIC has relentlessly pushed its agenda in the UN by lobbying and by passing resolutions to prohibit the defamation of religion. Unfortunately, the OIC’s idea of what constitutes an insult is considerably broader than the pope’s. So is the penalty for insult. Whereas the pope will merely reproach you, the OIC wants to put you in jail. Its goal is to criminalize criticism of Islam and to punish Islamophobia with prison."

[TheProcess]

Originally Posted by Woodrow LI

You have to deal in terms of individuals. There have been Muslims that committed atrocities. They did so because they were evil, not because they practiced Islam.

It's entirely possible that:

(1) When people act they are following a religious teaching, or inspired by a religion in some way
(2) A religion may have bad teachings or bad elements in it

Define "Traditional" Islam

Mainstream forms that have existed down the centuries

You can demonize individuals that do evil. But that is no cause to demonize all people that perform Islam.

Who said anything about "all people"?

You can be critical of a religion without the criticism applying to every single individual.

[Woodrow LI]

Originally Posted by TheProcess

It's entirely possible that:

(1) When people act they are following a religious teaching, or inspired by a religion in some way
(2) A religion may have bad teachings or bad elements in it




Mainstream forms that have existed down the centuries




Who said anything about "all people"?

You can be critical of a religion without the criticism applying to every single individual.

well when one is on an Islamic forum that only has 4 or 5 regular Muslim posters, we do have a tendency to feel paranoid and become defensive.

Perhaps I am personalizing too much. I actually dislike debates and in real life strive to avoid all conflict.

I agree that is not the best wait to present anything, but being one of the few Muslim posters here, I seem to be what everybody is stuck with.

To be honest I am old and wary and believe I may soon have to cease posting altogether and just stick to moderating.