Do NOT Bash Muslims

Mohammed just tried to do the best with what he felt was safe at the time…

Politics always tries to interfere with the spirit…

It’s not an unusual story

for sure, but I was highlighting that people read it subjectively, and so if he says its ok to them its ok, even though ‘ok’ here is two completely different things. I am sure it is more world wide culture than religion itself.

  • I expect we were like it in the past too, everyone living in single roomed homes and what have you.

I am not blaming people for their inheritance, I just think that honesty to themselves will tell them the truth of it. it is societies which need to change not necessarily religions [although they all suck too], it isn’t ok to say ‘oh its ok, as it is traditional to cook babies in carthage’, or some equivalent.

doing shit IS doing shit, excuses ARE excuses, no?

Well… Then there’s this !!!

patheos.com/blogs/daylightat … n-muslims/

Additionally… You know what’s funny about religion???

The best non idolators in the world have always been and will always be atheists !!!

lol yes. thing with the quote is that there are plenty of contradicting quotes. you have to be in the group or you are Frankenstein’s monster, when the truth is that they themselves are. …I am not blaming people for nature being nature, nor causality being what it is, its just that we are reaching times when it has to change. the weaponry of the future [near] is going to send it all to hell otherwise.

Allah wants exaltation above all others, and Allah will be the lowest of them…

There is a continual judgement, not a final one

I often ask that too. It is an interesting and - unfortunately - a currently relevant question. But I have to ask back: How much feminisation and/or islamisation do you mean, if you not always and not exclusively mean each of both as a whole (100%)?

Feminism is a product of the Occidental culture, whereas islamism is a product of the Arabic/Islamic culture. Although they contradict each other, they can and do, as we can currently experience in Europe, also complement each other (unfortunately).

Both are totalitarian, but totalitarianism is a product of the Occidental culture too. So islamism in a reaction to many Occidental phenomena is not only their contradiction but also their antithesis in the meaning of Hegel’s dialectic. Thus islamism has indeed become a part of the Occidental historical process.

And (because of: Cui bono?): Are globalists Hegelians (namely both Left-Hegelians and Right-Hegelians)?

Bash, Bash

Note I am referring to the Quran ONLY and not any knowledge beside the Quran [which is the core representation of Islam].

Therefore any reference to other than the Quran as representative of Islam is irrelevant to the point in this case. If you read again, I DID NOT doubt your other knowledge at all since they are not the issue on hand.

I appreciate your wide range of knowledge. Personally I do read VERY widely but no point for me to mention the details since it is not the topic.

But to discuss such critical elements on Islam we must be VERY familiar with the Quran itself [the mainstay of Islam]. I even resort to learning Arabic [basic] to get a better grasp of the Quran. Secondary knowledge about Islam is not effective. Btw, this is the typical counter from Muslims who always insist critics of Islam must read the Quran in Arabic.

Good point.

This is where the world leaders are spewing ‘lies’ based on ignorance and when brainwashed by Muslim advisers relying to Tagiya. They are doing a disservice to humanity by spreading such ‘lies’ and being politically correct.

This sort of ignorance by the world leaders and many community leaders represent their indirect complicity to the evils and violence committed by SOME evil prone Muslims.

This is why I am suggesting non-Muslims must read the Quran directly [& effectively] to understand it thoroughly

If you do a proper root cause analysis you will definitely find Islam [in part, not wholly] is a critical contributing factor to the evils and violence committed by SOME [not all] evil prone Muslims [including those with mental issues].

Islam is a religion [one exception] that has evil laden elements within its holy texts [the Quran] that influence and inspire SOME Muslims who are born with an active evil tendencies to commit terrible evil and violence.

It is very natural at present there are a percentile of humans who are mental and those who are born with an active evil impulse. For most of these evil prone people they are triggered by external evil elements to commit evils and violence.
The Quran [core representation of Islam] contains loads of evil laden elements that catalyze SOME evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils in the name of their religion.

Note the contrast, there are no leading evil laden elements in the texts of Buddhism. Therefore even when there are naturally evil prone Buddhists, there are no evil laden elements in the Buddhist texts to influence these evil prone Buddhists to commit evils and violence. If these evil prone Buddhist commit evil as in Myanmar, it has nothing to do with Buddhism per-se.

Thus one can infer from the above analysis, Islam [in part, not whole] drives Islamic inspired terrorism, evils and violence around the world.

In the case of Islamic-inspired-violence, the SOME evil prone Muslims are not primarily at fault since the majority are unfortunately born with an inherent active tendency to commit evil.

I’m not allowed to respond because I was told I intimidate you.

I wonder if when the Crusades were happening if there were like people on websites talking about, “hey it’s that damned christianity that’s causing all this genocide! it’s the bible telling them to do it!”

Note the NT abrogated the OT for Christians. Where in the New Testaments did Jesus exhort Christians to fight non-believers?

It is the Crusaders as human beings who were fighting in the crusades but not as Christians within Christianity the ideology of Jesus.

I am quite sure the Crusaders would have been rebuked by God on their Judgment Day,

God to the Crusaders: WTF, Jesus exhorted you to love your enemies, who gave you permission to fight your enemies! Now sit in that hot corner of Hell till you hear of my reprieve.

Btw, there are loads of thousands of evil laden verses in various degrees [without specific restraints] in the Quran that combined together to influence and inspire SOME [not all] evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence.

Why the deflection to the Crusades that was not directly inspired by Christianity [verses in the NT] and it is 500+ years ago from the current critical evils and violence from Islam [in part]?
I am aware Christianity [and other religions] has its negative baggage that hinder humanity’s progress but we should compare this with the very serious threat to humanity from the terrible evils and violence from Islam [in part].

Given the doctrine of Islam where Muslims love death more than life on Earth and are heavily rewarded for martyrdom in the cause of Allah, there is a potential threat they could exterminate the human species when they get access to cheap WMDs with their oil money or financial support from rich rogue Muslim nations.

Even without the above serious threats evil prone Muslims [SOME] are already doing much terror and damage to humanity at the present. It is pointless to make comparison on this with the crusades that happened 500++ years ago.

Prismatic567

No one is born like anything, we would be feral if we were brought up in the wild, and act like animals. Words cannot be evil, you have to enact them to make them evil, and as soon as you enact an idea, it is your interpretation – you doing it. In other words, it is peoples interpretations which are misreading it, or otherwise enacting it in some way, as well as people like you misreading it by reading that into it.

You can take any person and give them someone else’s causality, and they would be that person doing those things. There is 100% no information outside of the system which makes you better than another or vice-versa. Everything is taught, not arrived at by magic. You need to learn how to think things through properly.

_

Are you saying I have not thought things through properly?
It is not easy to present such in a forum but here is how I often thought it through properly.

Because evil is a very loose term, first we have define and agree on what is meant by ‘evil’.

What is evil?
What is not good is by default evil. Evil is any thing that is net-negative and net-harmful to the individual and therefrom to the well being of humanity.
The concept of evil can be very subjective and to ensure a high degree of objectivity we need to establish the following;

  1. Obtain a full or thorough listings of what acts are generally termed directly or synonymously as ‘evil.’
  2. Obtain consensus on what is obviously recognized as evil.
  3. Put aside contentious elements for further deliberations.

I don’t thing it is difficult for us to agree on a list representing what is obviously ‘evil’.

  1. Do you or in general most people will agree mass genocides, mass rapes, serial killing, premedited murder, tortures, torture then murder are ‘evil’.
  2. Do you agree deliberately lying is evil albeit of low degree in comparison to those in 1.

If we do a serious exercise of a taxonomy of the elements of evils, I am sure you and I [and most people] can agree on a listing on what is obviously recognized as evil whilst putting aside whatever is contentious. This common consensus of what is evil as supporting with a list of evil elements is our objective grounds [not absolute but open for contentious views any time].

Do you agree with the above definition of evil and establish objective grounds for further discussions?

This view of yours is not effective to the issue.

The effective approach is to start from empirical evidence of the acts of what are regarded as evil as established in the exercise above.
It is a fact there are committed acts of genocides, mass rapes, mass murder, premeditated murders, tortures of others, and all sorts of acts that are recognized as evil. Such evils will continue to be committed in the future till humanity does some thing to prevent them.

It is from these facts of evils based on empirical evidence and conceptual deliberations that we seek the root causes of these acts.

It is well recognized in research the basic root causes of evil of any human acts are traceable to two main root causes, i.e.

  1. Nature or
  2. Nurture

The evils can be

  1. purely nature or combined with nurture
  2. purely nurture and

If humans are brought up in the wild, I don’t believe all humans brought up in such a way would be totally feral because all humans has evolved to date with our human_ness nature within our DNA. Thus a percentage may turned feral but not ALL humans will turn feral.

My point is all humans has the potential [note] to turn feral because we evolved with a feral [beastly] base but as humans we have sufficient strong neural circuits that inhibit [evolved over 6 million years] such beastly potential. It is different with pigs which were domesticated not too long ago in comparison.

But as I had proposed, it is likely 20% [conservatively] will have weaker inhibitors to suppress the beastly impulses within and thus they have an active [activated not dormant] beastly or evil potential. These are the ones who will kill easily and commit other types of evils.

Why do I say 20% conservatively?
Such an approximation can be inferred from real evidence from patterns of human acts and elements.
Note the Principles of the Bell or Normal Curve which indicate ‘roughly’ human elements and variable are generally distributed in sets of percentiles.
Take for example human heights, 20% of all human will likely to be under [say] 4 feet 6 inches and 20% be over 6 feet and the rest having an average of say 5 feet 6 inches. I am guessing the figures but if we are to do actual measurements of all humans [or a large sample] we can establish the various heights within the various percentile sets.

My present guess is 20% [conservatively] has an active evil tendencies to commit various degrees of evil. To guess that 20% of people will lie, cheat, bribe, etc. to some degrees is very likely.

It is obvious words themselves do not commit evil.
However, words in a context of ‘evil’ [as defined above] can trigger the evil prone humans to commit evil.
This is so obvious with ideologies that has evil laden elements that brainwash its followers to commit terrible evils [as defined] and violence.

What you have assumed is some one reading any texts and interpreting it, enact on it and its results are evil. I believe you are not thinking through this point properly.

What we have in reality are the following;

  1. People with active good tendencies
  2. People with active evil tendencies
  3. Texts [ideas] with good laden elements
  4. Texts [ideas] with evil elements.

A. The majority of good people with tendencies to do good when exposed to texts [ideas] with good element will do good and they will not enact and ignore texts with evil elements. case]. However a small percentage of good people on the fringe may be influenced to commit evil when they are exposed to evil elements in various texts, especially religious texts with evil elements as in the Quran.

B. The majority of evil people with active tendencies to commit evil, when exposed to texts [ideas] with evil elements, will feast on them and commit evils. These evil prone people may or may not enact good elements when reading them.

C. It is also possible for evil prone people to read texts with good elements but misinterpret them with evil lenses and thus commit evil based on a misinterpretations.

From what you have assumed, what you have missed out the prior existence of people who are born with active evil tendencies.
These unfortunate people who are born with an active evil tendencies are like those who are born color-blind. It is due to the wrong connections in the brain during fetus developments and other reasons. The way they are nurture in their life could make their evil tendencies worst or lesser. For the hardcore, i.e. those with really bad connections in the brain, no amount of exposure to good environment, preventive or corrective measures can curb their evil tendencies. There are loads of empirical evidences for such cases.

The above is just a clue but if one were to read more extensively on the subject, there’s possible truth to the hypothesis.

Magsj, Magsj, Magsj… What are we going to do with you?

I could answer that several ways Turd lol, but I’ll go with saying that it doesn’t mean that you can’t reply back in this thread.

More precisely please: The crusades happened between 1096 and 1270.

Note: Jerusalem, which the Christians wanted to reconquer, had been occupying by the Moslems since they conquered huge Christian territories (including the region with Jerusalem - of course) by terrible wars, violence, and other evils.

Say what you want, but Islam is a hate-and-war-religion, whereas Christianity is a love-and-peace-religion.

So is Judaism. You aren’t supposed to bash them either (even more so in the USA).

That is the distinction.