First show me evidences as a comparative [see below] to the present situations, the numbers of Christians who have blown up a bar or committed other terrible evils and violence based on verses from the New Testaments or in the teachings of Jesus.
As a comparison, note Islam at its worst; [29,275]
The point is, if any Christian were to kill by bombing a place of adultery, he would be rebuked and punished severely by God on Judgment Day, i.e.
God to Sinful Christian: WTF! I told you in the New Testament to “love your enemies” not kill them! blah, blah, blah. You have committed a great sin. Now go to HELL!
Note I stated the NT’s absolute pacifist maxim 'Love Your Enemies" overrides any “killings of others, even enemies …” verses in the Old Testament.
This overriding absolute pacifist maxim restraints any Christians from killing any one, Period!
If any Christian ever kill s/he will go to hell. This is why there will no such similar statistics [or even 1%] as above from the Christians.
K: bush Jr invaded Iraq and killed in the neighborhood of 500,000 people and bush Jr.
is a born again… It doesn’t matter to a Christian if they kill one or a billion because of
Christian theology…You can be redeem on your death bed if you ask for forgiveness…
God will forgive any and all sins if you ask for forgiveness… that is in the bible
and millions upon millions believe this…ask for forgiveness and you will go to
heaven… regardless of your crimes and your sins…
P: The point is, if any Christian were to kill by bombing a place of adultery, he would be rebuked and punished severely by God on Judgment Day, i.e.
God to Sinful Christian: WTF! I told you in the New Testament to “love your enemies” not kill them! blah, blah, blah. You have committed a great sin. Now go to HELL!
Note I stated the NT’s absolute pacifist maxim 'Love Your Enemies" overrides any “killings of others, even enemies …” verses in the Old Testament.
This overriding absolute pacifist maxim restraints any Christians from killing any one, Period!
If any Christian ever kill s/he will go to hell. This is why there will no such similar statistics [or even 1%] as above from the Christians.
[/quote]
K: there is no such thing as an overriding absolute pacifist maxim preventing a
Christian from doing anything… there is nothing anywhere in the bible
that says this…show me in the bible…
First, any one can be a Christian without much pre-qualification on their psychological state.
Thus the worst murderer [serial killer] can simply repent his past and submit to be a Christian.
Thus this inherent murder [now a Christian] could be suddenly hit with a strong impulse to murder and went on a rampage to kill.
In this case, we cannot blame Christianity because there are no verses in the NT [dictate what is Christianity] that sanction any Christian to kill any one and even his/her enemies.
This serial killer killed because he was a serial killer who could not control his impulse.
Bush Jr. did invoke God before the USA invaded Iraq but any Christian can invoke any thing, however it cannot be related to Christianity unless there are verses in the NT and teachings of Jesus to support one to go to war against non-Christians.
Your example of Bush Jr. is not effective because he was not representing Christianity but representing rather the United States of America with its own Constitution and citizens of various religions and other beliefs.
In addition, the Foreign Minister of Iraq was a Christian and there were many soldiers in Saddam’s army who were Christians.
I don’t believe Bush Jr. will be punished severely because he was merely doing his duty legal within the Constitution. It is just like God will not punish an executioner severely because that was his official duty.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
You will not be able to give an effective counter if you yourself have not read the Quran and be familiar with the Ahadith and Sira of Islam.
In the above case, it is Nyang [author of the article] who was cherry picking.
Note a commentary on this verse 3:172;
This verse refer to the midst of violence by Muhammad and his men and ‘what was right’ was the followers obedience of Muhammad to continue fighting and more violence.
The above article quoted;
“To those against whom war is made, permission is given [to fight] because they are wronged; and verily, God is most powerful for their aid,”
This is verse 22:39.
The problem with this verse and in many situation, the conditions for permission to fight or self-defense are vaguely stated and comprised of dualistic truths in the Quran, like the DUCK-RABBIT image which contain two truths within one image.
For example, in the drawing of cartoons of Prophet Muhammad, those evil prone Muslims who killed many non-Muslims interpreted they [Muslims] and Islam has been WRONGED, so based on verse 22:39 they are given permission to fight and in the process kill non-Muslims.
Now WHO ON EARTH can judge and decide whether these killers are right or wrong in their interpretation of 22:39?
Answer is no one because there are no central authority, if some claim to be, they cannot because only Allah can have the final say.
Since Allah will never appear on Earth to judge evil prone Muslims till they die and appear in Allah’s court, these evil prone Muslims will continue to fight and kill non-Muslims based on their own interpretations of what is ‘wronged’ with sincere belief they are doing their duty as a good Muslim destined toward Paradise [with hope of 72 virgins].
So in verse 22:39 Allah sanction [gives permission] and condone potential evils and violence.
The majority of Muslims will not exploit the ambiquity and dualistic truths within such verses as 22:39 but a minority, say 20% of evil prone Muslims who are born with evil tendency will natural response with evil, i.e. fight and kill non-Muslims who has wronged Islam.
But note, even though it is the minority, 20% or even 10% of 1.5 billion is a very critical quantum of 300 million or 150 millions potential evil prone Muslims respectively.
These minority 150-300 million evil prone Muslims are extra sensitive due to their existential desperations and the slightest event can be interpreted as wronged or a threat to Islam and Muslims, and they naturally respond with terrible evils and violence in retaliations. This is happening in reality and it is so evident around the world.
Note verse 22:39 with its open ended ‘wronged’ is merely one of tons of evil loaded verses. I have done an analysis and noted there are 3,400 verses out of the total of 6,236 verses [55% ] that can combined in various ways to trigger sensitive and evil prone Muslims to justify them committing evils and violence on non-Muslims and even other Muslims [deemed as hypocrites, apostate, traitors, etc.] with encouragement and permission from Allah of the Quran.
There are loads of real evil loaded verses that influence and inspire SOME Muslims who are evil prone to commit terrible evils and violence. It is only natural and instinctual for any Muslims as a believer to be imperatively blind to such evil elements [like not seeing a 500 pound gorilla in the room].
So there are Islam-Inspired-Terrorist and the Quran [in part] is to be blamed.
As mentioned and explained, the evil prone Muslim should NOT take the major blame because they were unfortunately born with evil tendencies or had been brainwashed by others using this evil ideology which is partly from Islam.
If you want to counter me effectively, I suggest you read the Quran objectively and thoroughly first.
Note I stated 20% of Muslims [as with All humans] are prone to evils.
Violence is one type of ‘evil.’
I normally state 20% of all humans are prone to evil but I have not committed to state 20% of all human are prone to violence. I don’t have statistics on this, but it is a fact violence in various degrees is prevalent among humans as glaringly evident.
Here is my justifications for 20% [conservatively] of all humans are evil prone.
Evil is represented by a range from 1/100-low to 99/100-high.
Lying is a type of evil, albeit from the lower range.
Therefore 60% of All people are prone to commit evil.
To assert 20% of all people are prone to commit a range of evil acts [including murder, cheating, corruption, stealing, torture, rape, other major and minor crimes, etc.] is thus conservative and safe bet to its truth.
The very evil acts [the psychopaths, mass murderer, genocides, mass rapes, mass torture, mass oppressions, etc.] may only be committed by say 1% or less. This is a serious and significant quantum because merely one lone wolf is enough to generate terrible damage and horror to humanity. 1% of is 70 million of the world’s population and is 15 million of the most evil Muslims.
In reality, terrible evils are often led by a small group of charismatic evil leaders leading a group of direct followers who in turn influence the majority. One example is Hitler and his gang influencing the German people during WW II. It is the same with other dictators and evil leaders.
Thus to have 15 million [if 1%] or 150 million [if 10%] of evil prone Muslim, being influenced and inspired by the evil loaded verses in the Quran as sanctioned by Allah is a very frightening potential. This is not even a speculation but it is already a reality, one example; [29,285] was [29,275] a day ago!
Note this [rough] counter is merely one type of evil act that involved death of victims. There are loads of other types of evils committed by evil prone Muslims around the world but there are no readily available statistics for me to link.
Still, diddly, got any numbers for the opposite Muslims? Probably not. Probably would just not work well. The millions of Muslims that are helping societies just are not dramatic. The doctors , the educators, the charity workers, etc. they count for nothing even though they far out number the evil. Oh and many are women that have degrees even PHDs.
How many Christians or Jewish are in prison? Or mass murderers? What is so different? Oh wait , yea you mentioned an interpretation of an ambiguous text as the provocation.
Does not mean diddly unless you are willing to severely remove all texts and media.
You are going off topic and conflating [fallacious] unnecessary.
It is of utmost criticalness that ALL evils must be addressed and resolved, i.e. those related to Muslims and non-Muslims, secular and non-secular, etc.
This OP is about “Muslim Terrorist” so by protocol we have to stick to topic, i.e. specifically on Muslims and Islam only, not deflecting to non-Muslims evils and issues. Btw, I am not blaming the evil prone Muslims as the primary cause to the terrible evils and violence committed in the name of Islam.
There is no deliberate and total blindness to Muslims who are doing good but it it off topic to bring them in to deflect and dilute the issue of the OP.
Let say, some one notice a sudden appearance of a small dark mole on their skin and ask your advice. Are you going to change the subject by saying the person should ignore such an insignificant mole because the rest of the person skin is flawless? The health wisdom these days is one should check with the medical experts to ensure what mole that appear suddenly or not malignant.
The typical of using other examples to deflect and dilute the topic on hand is bad logical thinking, i.e. they come within the red-herring, tu-quoque fallacy. This is a very common defense mechanism, e.g. to deflect from this topic, many will invoke, what about Hitler - a Christian, what about Mao, Stalin, etc. etc.
Know thyself.
One interesting self-knowledge would perhaps try to understand why one has that tendency to deflect from the main topic in this case or in others.
You brought up numbers, you brought up the contraversy. Am I only to agree in order to stay on topic? I cannot point out opposition? If so what the hell is there to discuss?
To stay on topic your either agree or disagree. I thought that is very obvious. You can point out opposition if you think my premises are wrong, but fallacious counters are not credible and a waste of time.
Note this OP and my original intention is specifically about “Muslim” Terrorists not “religious” terrorists.
If you want to discuss terrorists related to other religion, here is an OP for it. viewtopic.php?f=5&t=191323
So no comparing, no social numbers other than your terrorists, no mentioning the other Muslims or how they translate, we must only agree with you in order to stay on topic.
This thread is about “Muslim Terrorists” and their evil acts. Note it is not agreeing to my expectations but it is a normal forum protocol of staying to topic as much as possible.
The Dalai Lama argued there is no such thing as “Muslim Terrorists” and I argued otherwise and provided my justifications. What is your views on the above?
If you want to discuss other religious terrorists, comparisons, numbers or whatever is related to the topic, you can do it here which I started for that purpose. Religious Terrorists viewtopic.php?f=5&t=191323
The Dalai Lama merely pointed out that “Islamic Terrorist” is an oxymoron, much like “Islamic Christian” or “Islamic Judaist”. If you are truly one, you can’t also be the other. They are not subgroups.
There are terrorists who happen to be Islamic and thus use Islamic excuses. There are terrorists that happen to be Secular and thus use Secular excuses. There are terrorists who happen to be Judaist and thus use Judaist excuses.
Cherry picked statements , well If you are allowed to pick out violent ones then others are allowed to find the peaceful ones and live by those. The majority choose the peace. The very small minority live by the violent. The majority disowns the minority. The minority still claims they are part of the majority. The majority says no. Well if the majority says no then it is no. If your family disowns you, you may keep the name, have the genetics but, you are not family.
If the majority tells the Dalai Lama that the terrorist groups are not Muslim then terrorists are not part of the family. You cherry pick on 10 or 20 percent when 80 to 90 percent want peace. You bitch about how horrible the text is and you are not even raised in a home that follows. Words are interpretive, especially in religious texts. You and a few interpret hate, the majority does not. I think that says a lot about the individual.
