Why Is Religion Unquestionable?

[ageofknowledge]

Terrorists, in general, seem to have political, economic, social, or psychological motives for what they do; however, Islamic terrorists appear to be primarily motivated by a theocratic religion that teaches submission of the entire world to Allah and their view of the world. Some of the reasons for this are:

1. They are taught to. Fundamental Islamic education appears to have an effect on the attitudes of many Muslims toward Christians and nations they perceive as "Christian." They are told that Christians hate them and want to wipe Islam off the face of the earth and that they can never be friends unless they convert to Christianity (Surah 5:51-Ali Translation).

Additionally they are told great stories about heroes of the Islamic faith, like Khalid ibn Walid the "Sword of Allah" and taught an idealized version of early Islam when Muslims read the Quran literally and applied it to their lives. This, despite its bloody history. They learn songs like "I Shall Avenge My God and Belief" which tell of "delivering death and hell to the unbelievers." It's important to note that the modern Great Awakening of Islamic fundamentalism we see today is based primarily on the modern society defined as Jahiliyyah and the "need" for a vanguard to re-Islamize society.

2. Islamic law. One point that separates the radical Muslim from all others is Islamic law. Islamic law is a powerful concept because it is viewed as a direct command from the Quran. Radical scholars attach it inseparably to the worship of Allah. Islamic law is the line that divides the religious terrorist from the secular terrorist. It's rigid logic binds the radical Muslim to Islamic law with resolve.

3. The radical sees themself as surrounded by infidels who are hostile to them and their message of faith. All key radical writers put great energy into arguing that nearly all socieities are infidel both those who call themselves Muslim and the others. It goes without saying that Jews and Christians are infidels despite liberal attempts to show they are not because a small level of tolerance was afforded them as "people of the book"; a people to be certain whose numbers have dwindled after centuries of persecution and discrimination of a level few Westerners understand. The radical believes that Islam is not merely belief that should be preached but a way of life that must take shape as a system of authority on earth just as it did during the life of Muhammad. Islam is a theocracy: a religion and a state without borders.

4. Punishment or reward. The Quran condemned Muslims who avoided the duty of jihad (Surah 9:38-39, Shakir Translation) and in this religion that offers little guarantees in the way of eternal security, the Quran teaches that being killed in jihad guarantees one entrance to paradise (Surah 4:74). Moderates argue this is not primarily a physical fight but radicals always push back against those teachings.

These primarily are the reasons Islamic terrorists do what they do. And apparently the end justifies the means. If unable to simply spread Islam by the sword as they once did in large areas of the globe (Muslim invaders killed seventy million Indians for example when they invaded India... killing 100,000 in a day just for sport), they resort to different strategies. Take lying for example. Lying was a widespread practice among Muslims until Muhammad realized that it was turning into a grave danger threatening the growth of his message in Arabia. He rebuked his followers but permitted it under three circumstances: During war; To reconcile between two feuding parties; To a spouse in order to please her.

It is the first one we take note of. Radicals divide Jihad into three phases:

1. Patience: In this phase Muslims are a minority living in a non-Muslim country; therefore, they are not required to fight against the enemies but to be patient as they wait to enter the second phase. Deceit may become a part of daily life for a Muslim in this position as they practice Muhammad's words "All lying is a sin except the one benefiting the Muslim or the one keeping him out of harm's way."

This is the state that Britain is currently in as things slowly move to phase 2: the Preparation phase.

2. Preparation: In this phase, the Muslims are required to gather their resources in order to enter a direct and real war against their enemies.

3. War: In this phase, Muslims convert from sitting patiently into actively moving toward altering the conditions around them and changing the country into a new Islamic country. Lying is completely authorized to the Muslim during war and Muhammad's phrase "war is deception" is widely known and quoted.

It's not a pretty picture the way Islamic takeover happen whether by the sword or subterfuge. Despite moderate seasons, eventually Muslims who grow serious regarding Islam revert back to the fundamentalist state of sharia islamic law as Muslim doctrine is not and never was moderate. Countries that implement sharia islamic law provide a model of what you can expect.

I find it ironic that an atheist would welcome Islam into their midst yet spend their life fighting against Christianity. I believe it is ignorance and deception on their part. If they truly understood how they are perceived in Islam doctrine and dealt with in countries that have adopted Islam fully or better yet moved to and lived under such an Islamic theocracy, most would take a very different position. I've had Pinoy friends that were imported as labor into Saudi Arabia and other Muslim theocracies before immigrating to the United States and they were not at all flippant about Islam afterwards. Christian countries have very different attitudes toward atheists. We can agree to disagree because God gives each person the right to a choice regarding Him and this liberty is reflected in our cultures and nations that were founded by mostly Christian individuals. The atheists in Western Civilizations, by and large, can live out their atheistic view of the world and work to destroy the Christian inflouence as they minimize the growing Islamic influence that may one day displace us all.

[ManOfScience]

... submission of the entire world to Allah and their view of the world.

This is the "Kingdom of God", right? Basically the same belief held by Christians? [Note: I'm no expert on these beliefs, so this is a genuine question.]

They are told that Christians hate them and want to wipe Islam off the face of the earth and that they can never be friends unless they convert to Christianity (Surah 5:51-Ali Translation).

Is the reason that there's such animosity between these two religions because they're so closely related? I find it funny/sad that people who share such similar beliefs can find so much to fight about.

Radical scholars attach it inseparably to the worship of Allah.

Not trying to start something here, as it's a topic in its own right; just drawing a parallel. To me, this seems similar to the radical Christians who insist on interpreting Genesis literally (albeit not with quite the same consequences!).

And apparently the end justifies the means.

That's pretty much the answer I received to the "Why is there suffering on Earth?" question the other day.

[Gman]

But I still don't think you understood my question. My question was not about theists questioning (or not questioning) their faith. Rather, it was about the way in which religion sometimes allows people or groups of people to get away with things (in terms of society or culture) that would otherwise be ruled unlawful (or at least unacceptable).

In fact, it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with true belief at all, when you really get down to the truth, because I'm sure that some of these individuals and groups claim religion as a way of circumventing laws or normal social limits. (But that doesn't make the question any less valid.)

If you mean people using religion to dominate over others or financial gain, then yes, I would agree with that. We have all seen it in our days, the Jim Baker types etc.. Even Christ warns of such. But it is condemned in scripture. The Bible states that if you want to be first in life you have to go last..

[touchingcloth]

AoK - good post. Can't really fault any of it unless you're including me under "atheists who welcome islam and fight against christianity".

Have you got any good links/references for the bit about the 3 phases of jihad - I'd like to read more about that...

[Gman]

Not trying to start something here, as it's a topic in its own right; just drawing a parallel. To me, this seems similar to the radical Christians who insist on interpreting Genesis literally (albeit not with quite the same consequences!).

Islam is quite different from Christianity.. According to the Quran...

Sura 61:9 He it is Who sent His Messenger with the guidance and the true religion, that He may make it overcome the religions, all of them.

Sura 9:33 It is He Who has sent His Noble Messenger with guidance and the true religion, in order to prevail over all other religions - even if the polytheists get annoyed.

Sura 9:29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission (the full tax), and feel themselves subdued.

Sura 9:5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

[Gman]

This would be the Christian response to war. War is certainly not used to spread the gospel. It can be used however to thwart more wars... (defensive)

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... LLkUc6xk6O

[ageofknowledge]

... submission of the entire world to Allah and their view of the world.

This is the "Kingdom of God", right? Basically the same belief held by Christians? [Note: I'm no expert on these beliefs, so this is a genuine question.]

--> No that's incorrect. Christian theology teaches that Jesus ushered in God's kingdom in a spiritual way for humanity. In fact, many fell away after Jesus was crucified because they were expecting Him to usher in an earthly kingdom and he did not. Jesus expressed the idea of salvation and eternal life in terms of entrance into the Kingdom of God. Christian theology does not teach a worldwide theocracy must be realized through force of arms and subterfuge as Islam teaches. Christianity teaches that Jesus made it possible for humans, who make the free will choice to, to spiritually enter into the kingdom of heaven or the kingdom of God. This is completely different than what Islam teaches.

They are told that Christians hate them and want to wipe Islam off the face of the earth and that they can never be friends unless they convert to Christianity (Surah 5:51-Ali Translation).

Is the reason that there's such animosity between these two religions because they're so closely related? I find it funny/sad that people who share such similar beliefs can find so much to fight about.

--> To a person uneducated in Christianity and Isalm they may seem alike I suppose, but they are completely different systems of belief with completely different theologies. I've read quite a mish mash of error from comparative religion professors that didn't have a clue. You appear to have fallen into the same error.

Radical scholars attach it inseparably to the worship of Allah.

Not trying to start something here, as it's a topic in its own right; just drawing a parallel. To me, this seems similar to the radical Christians who insist on interpreting Genesis literally (albeit not with quite the same consequences!).

--> You honestly equate Islamic law overtaking a culture with the fact that about 40% of Christians believe in a young earth cosmology? Hello! It's time to wake from your slumber *snap* *snap*. Having an opinion on a point of science does not equate to Islamic theocratic rule under sharia.

And apparently the end justifies the means.

That's pretty much the answer I received to the "Why is there suffering on Earth?" question the other day.

--> Interesting, that's usually the behavior I see in atheists.

[ageofknowledge]

AoK - good post. Can't really fault any of it unless you're including me under "atheists who welcome islam and fight against christianity".

Have you got any good links/references for the bit about the 3 phases of jihad - I'd like to read more about that...

Thank you touchingcloth. I used to have a blog and that was drawn from one of the articles I wrote for it. You could start with the book 'Journey into the Mind of an Islamic Terrorist' by Mark A. Gabriel. Mark grew up a Muslim in Egypt during their radicalization period eventually becoming a professor of Islamic history and lecturer at Al-Azhar University in Cairo (the most preeminent university in Isalm) who said he was fired, arrested and tortured after questioning Islamic practices; he eventually converted to Christianity.

[ManOfScience]

--> Interesting, that's usually the behavior I see in atheists.

To what were you referring? It's a bit difficult to tell, when you quote the entire thing!

[Byblos]

TC, your first point is a good one. However, I know there are a lot of muslims in your country who are ecstatic that you are ignorant of their plots within your country. You couldn't be more wrong. The world is not moving towards freedom.

There's a lot of them, and they can plot all they like...but they're in a minority even within the muslim community.

Then you are delusional as to what Islam truly is.

Not really - I've lived in a few areas with very large muslim communities so I've known lots of muslims over the years. The vast majority of muslims in the UK are moderate and well-integrated.

Sure there's a bubbling undercurrent of radical fundamentalism, but believe me when I say that it's currently of no threat in the UK. Jihadists and those who would instate sharia law in the UK are denounced by all but the most radical clerics.

But that wasn't my reference, was it? I was referring to Islam as a religion, not the majority of (misguided) Muslims who think they're practicing the religion of peace, it is not.

And by the way, not only did I live among them, I was born and raised in the Middle East, all along thinking just like you do: they're just good people, practicing their religion just like we are. Until 1975 that is when we were slaughtered for being Christian. Gman posted some very good quotes from the Quran that shows you what kind of religion it is. Of course they will claim it's a religion of tolerance and peace and prove it by quoting suras that state exactly that. Are you familiar at all with the concept of abrogator and abrogated? Most Muslims are not, but it is in there in the Quran. Those tolerant and peaceful quotes were abrogated (nullified) by other suras that came later. To keep the veil of deception over the infidels and even their own (laymen) people the Quran is not laid out in chronological order (earlier suras do not come before later ones). This was done precisely so they can claim tolerance and peace, while secretly planning otherwise. Do you know who the true Muslims are? The ones that are currently practicing the true Islam? The Taliban and Osama Bin Laden, that's who. You people (Europe in general, France and England in particular) are sitting on a time bomb and are too dumb to hear the ticking. Sorry for the bluntness but it couldn't be said any other way. In a very small number of generations (3, maybe even 2) most of Europe will be an Islamic theocracy. Do you know who Islam abhors the most? People of the book (Christains, Jews), but most of all, they have a special hatred towards real non-believers (atheists). Welcome to dhimmitude my friend, start getting your children ready for it.

[touchingcloth]

But that wasn't my reference, was it? I was referring to Islam as a religion, not the majority of (misguided) Muslims who think they're practicing the religion of peace, it is not.
...
Do you know who the true Muslims are? The ones that are currently practicing the true Islam? The Taliban and Osama Bin Laden, that's who.

Who defines "true islam"? There are sects within all religions that claim to be the "one true branch" and, as with jihadists, they're usually pretty nutty.

In a very small number of generations (3, maybe even 2) most of Europe will be an Islamic theocracy.

Evidence? In the UK the people who make this kind of assertion are generally (whether by coincidence or not) the same people who are paranoid that immigrants are going to be running rampant, stealing our jobs and diluting our culture unless the indigenous peoples make a stand.

Oh, and thanks for reminding me that I'm too dumb to notice the ticking.

[ageofknowledge]

Sounds like Byblos has had a very rough time at the hands of Muslims in an Islamic country. I wouldn't hold the ticking thing against him touchingcloth. He used "you" in the universal sense as us in the West corporately speaking.

And Byblos makes an excellent point about the sutras being purposefully out of order. What you need to understand is though they are out of order in their presentation, the dates for each are graded with the earliest dates being superceded by the later dates.

The surahs of the early period, i.e., before the period of Hijra (pre-Medinah period) are surahs of Meccan origin. In the Qur'an, each period applicable to each surah is normally stated explicitly. The later period of surahs is from the Medinah period.

The surahs of the early, pre-Medinah and thus the Meccan period, are rather lyrical and poetical in style. In terms of content, more tolerant attitudes are adopted towards Jews and Christians as "owners of a Holy Book." Here, the elements of grace, mercy, and mutual tolerance dominate as motifs, even emphasizing the common traits of all three Abrahamic monotheistic religions. For this period, it is even reported in the Ahadith (plural of Hadith, "Traditions") that Muslims held their prayers in the prayer houses of either Christians or Jews, and that vice versa, Christians and Jews were allowed into the mosques of Muslims (if existent).

However, the Medinah period shows a form of rhyme dominating the surahs and most of the surah content refers to practical and legal matters (of how a Muslim should live in an Islamic community). In this period also, the confrontations between Jews and Christians assumed a more violent and aggressive style (probably not only on the part of the young Muslim community alone). Consequently, the statements on these other religious groups opposing Islam became more polemic and aggressive.

The latter teachings always trump the former teachings in Islam and from the beginning of Islam, no separation between the realms of religious and secular affairs was made. Islamic law was meant to address the spiritual as well as the physical and social needs of the world.

[touchingcloth]

It's ok, I'm fairly thick skinned , no offense taken.

Probably worth noting here that I don't disagree that there are some pretty reprehensible things in Islam, nor do I deny that there are aspects of the Koran that lend themselves well to justifying radical behaviour. I merely express scepticism that, e.g., Europe will be an Islamic theocracy/have an Islamic majority by year X as I don't think the data supports it.

[ageofknowledge]

It's ok, I'm fairly thick skinned , no offense taken.

Probably worth noting here that I don't disagree that there are some pretty reprehensible things in Islam, nor do I deny that there are aspects of the Koran that lend themselves well to justifying radical behaviour. I merely express scepticism that, e.g., Europe will be an Islamic theocracy/have an Islamic majority by year X as I don't think the data supports it.

But you're (again universal we're intended) playing with a growing fire that could, despite the modern liberal's unbelief, become a dominant power competing directly against their interests and view of the world in a very real way.

Islamic law simply isn't compatible with the 18th and 19th century Period of Enlightenment and the ideals of the French Revolution that laid the foundations for a more tolerant and democratic culture birthed in Christianized Western Civilization.

[touchingcloth]

It's ok, I'm fairly thick skinned , no offense taken.

Probably worth noting here that I don't disagree that there are some pretty reprehensible things in Islam, nor do I deny that there are aspects of the Koran that lend themselves well to justifying radical behaviour. I merely express scepticism that, e.g., Europe will be an Islamic theocracy/have an Islamic majority by year X as I don't think the data supports it.

But you're (again universal we're intended) playing with a growing fire that could, despite the modern liberal's unbelief, become a dominant power competing directly against their interests and view of the world in a very real way.

I'm not a great follower of the precautionary principle; there are any number of things that could happen - e.g. Fred Phelps could gain support throughout his country and then the world.
I'm not going to advocate stamping out a religion just because it could spiral out of control, especially not if the data doesn't suggest that it is likely to. And that's an atheist speaking...