Yuyutsu,

As you suggest, "If you see someone claiming that they are religious yet preach violence, then you have seen an impostor .... "

Of course, very likely, but that wouldn't stop them from using religion, and claiming to go exactly by the book of their religion - which ISIS does.

There probably isn't a religion in the world which hasn't been misused by 'imposters' who stick to the letter of their sacred texts. Currently that's ISIS and the Koran we're talking about.

So the question should be: to the extent that ISIS adheres to the Koran, is it possible for Islam to be inherently a violent religion ? i.e. that violence is built into Islam, as exemplified by the instructions throughout the Koran ?

Joe

Good question, Joe,

True, there probably isn't a religion in the world which hasn't been misused by impostors who stick to the letter of their sacred texts. You may be interested to learn that Buddha himself predicted that 500 years after his death this will start happening to his own new religion. I also visited the rock on the northern shore of the sea of Galilee where Jesus told Peter: "on this rock I will build my church". Well, nearly two millennia later of wear, tear and earthquakes including a 7.6 magnitude in the year 1202, I saw with mine own eyes that this rock is cracked. It is natural, it has to happen.

On the face of it, Islam seems to be a violent ideology and certainly parts of the Koran call for violence.

But is "Islam" really Islam?

'Islam' means surrender to God. In Hinduism and Yoga, this is an important principle which is referred to as the observance (Niyama) of "Ishvara Pranidhana". How wonderful indeed it is to give up one's own selfish will, submitting to God instead.

But is it indeed the will of God to harm others? Do Muslims actually kill, rape and torture others only for the love of God? No selfish motive there?

My answer is 'No'. Those who do it are not true Muslims, even if it be Muhammad himself (though I believe that, peace be upon him, he was framed by later generations of tribal hooligans and didn't really do any of the bad things ascribed to him in the Hadith, nor was he the author of the Koran). Even the desire to enjoy heaven with 72 beautiful virgins is selfish. Even if it was correct that killing infidels produces this result, one who surrenders to God will even surrender their desire for heaven, saying "Thy will be done, not mine".

Greetings Yuyutsu,
You write: "I do not understand where you are trying to get: are you trying to refute the principle of Ahimsa (or its Western version, the Golden Rule; or the biblical commandment "Love thine fellow as thyself") by claiming that one could be both violent AND religious at the same time?"

You have formed an opinion of religion to suit your own world view. And while you have a right to do so you must simultaneously assume an obligation to defend it. You are claiming that your opinion of what comprises religion is inviolate and that it follows inexorably and inevitably that you have an inviolable right to direct and stack the scenario as you see fit. Though it might strike at the very heart of your religious faith, nevertheless, those who live outside of religion, who rightly can claim an objectivity that is denied to you, have equally well-founded and compellingly defensible claims that stand in direct opposition to your views.

The mathematician, the scientist and the violence preacher represent a resort to analogy only. If this is your best "evidence" then you have no evidence at all. Analogy has no power to distinguish between truth and falsity. You are attempting to imbue analogy with your faith-based conviction and hoping no one will notice. I was impressed by the mock-heroic denouement referring to Jesus and messiah. Nice touch if you want to divert attention but otherwise irrelevant. If you can't do better then the contention that religion is comprised ONLY of goodness, truth and righteousness is in tatters. Cont......

Below is a post written by me on 19th March 2005 to one Ballested Moth when Microsoft discussion groups were at the zenith of their popularity and power. I was known as Biggles then.

[2] Arnold de Amaury [Arnaud Amalric], Bishop of Citeaux and papal legate to the French crusade against the heretical Albigensians [Cathars] was a devout christian. It was he who, when asked how the crusaders should distinguish between good catholics and heretics, cried, "Kill them all, for god knows his own!" 20,000 men women and children, many of them christians, were slaughtered in one terrible night in the town of Albi [Bezieres] by an army of devout christians.

[3] Hypatia of Alexandria was a woman, a mathematician, astronomer, philosopher and a pagan. In 415 CE she was attacked in a street of Alexandria by a group of christian monks, beaten and killed. Her body was dragged to a church where her remains were mutilated with sharp-edged tiles and later burned. St.Cyril, christian bishop of Alexandria explained that it was because she was an iniquitous female who had presumed, against god's commandments, to teach men.

[4] The chronicler, Raymond of Aguilers, described the scene when a band of crusaders massacred Muslims, Christians and Jews in Jerusalem in 1099 in the last year of the first crusade.
"Wonderful things were to be seen. Numbers of the Saracens were beheaded. Others were shot with arrows, or forced to jump from towers. Others were tortured for several days, then burned with flames. In the streets were seen piles of heads and hands and feet. One rode about everywhere amid the corpses of men and horses. In the Temple of Solomon, the horses waded in blood up to their knees, nay up to the bridle. It was a just and marvellous judgement of God, that this place should be filled with the blood of unbelievers."
     Nicetas Choniates, the Byzantine chronicler wrote, "Even the Saracens were merciful and kind compared to those men who bear the cross of Christ on their shoulders."      
     Para [4] is copied from THE DARK SIDE OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY by Helen Ellerbe.
 
Cont......

Cont.....Greetings Yuyutsu,
I should advise that the absent [1] in the numbers above held the tale of Rev.Jim Jones. I decided to omit him as such an extreme character is unnecessary to my argument.

You write: "Rather, I was commenting about religion - not about the impostors (or the deluded) who only claim to be religious."

Indeed, the religious are deluded, self-deluded in fact. And I was talking about religion too, as well as the religious. So many of the religious today glibly belittle and/or patronise dismissively the degree of devotion, the choice of dogma etc of their forbears. I find that brand of hypocrisy to be contemptible. I'm close to being convinced that you follow a similar path.

Often I hear from the media, “terrorism is not caused by the Muslim religion”.

My argument is that terrorism is not directly caused by the religious extremism, yet, people who are influenced by religion, feeling good about religion having undergone some previous long felt degrading emotion, having felt religions better felt environment experiences, are turned on by extreme religions.

After people feel rewarded by new reborn again purpose in life and or long term from childhood believers in religion, any person that creates the same feel good environments as preferred religions. Mixing religious ceremonies and religious wording with violent extremism phrases. Phrases religions put out to religious believers are not that much different than violent extremism phrases adding god's name into the phrases. Christian religion use bible short phrases to influences believers towards certain goals.

Religious believers find new more extreme emotional gratification in being part of a group quoting god's name as they move towards they're ultimate purpose.

In order to further understand my conclusions an attached PDF file has some startling theories I believe are worth every moment of reading.

https://www.pdfhost.net/index.php?Action=Download&File=c3c448557994423ca8bdab9a14cb64ee

To understand many things, read from the beginning. Within a few pages I believe truly intelligent readers will continue to read all the way to the end.

Readers may accuse me of telling people how to manipulate people using religion. My purpose is to force awareness onto media statements to inform people how bad influenced human behaviours are brought on by bad education, that parents should be aware what bad education does to young children.