Radical Islam : What is the fundamental motivation?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Vexen, Jan 8, 2015.

  1. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2015
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  8. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
  9. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    In that sense, it's reasonable to allow such religious - so long as they aren' misogynistic. Which, given the examples so far, they probably would be, sooner or later.
     
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    All of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i and Rasta) have extremely misogynistic components. It's not limited to Islam. Women are not allowed to rise into the upper ranks of the Catholic or Mormon hierarchy. The most Orthodox Jews don't allow women to pray at their most holy sites, and they don't allow a divorce to be final until the husband agrees to it.

    (BTW, if anyone wants to argue my accusation against the Baha'i and the Rastafarians, I could be persuaded that I'm wrong. For that matter, if anyone can provide evidence--less than five hundred pages--explaining that Baha'i is not really a branch of Abrahamism, the same offer applies.)

    Most of the world's religions have roots in the Bronze Age, when most women had few rights and little power.
     
  11. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    No, I never implied it was limited to Islam. The Orthodox Jewish courts are quite bad for it, or so I'd heard.
     
  12. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  13. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  14. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  15. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    I don't have a problem with pointing out the hateful speech of Islamic leaders, but coming from an ostensible Christian, the hypocrisy is rather striking.
     
  16. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  17. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  18. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    The former is correct while the latter is perhaps only partially correct. Their main motivation is the spread of Islam worldwide, but the Crusades were the response to their last attempt to do so by the same violent means we see today. The Crusades reclaimed lands taken in the goal of spreading Islam, so yes, this current campaign is a response to having that same motivation and means thwarted by the Crusades.

    Some things most people do not know about Islam:
    • Contrary to the Bible, which was written by many people over many hundreds of years, the Qur'an was written by one man over the course of his lifetime.
    • Also contrary to the Bible, the Qur'an does not include parables, symbolism and other literary devices of questionable interpretation. The Qur'an is largely plain spoken.
    • Where there are seeming contradictions in the Qur'an, the Qur'an itself explicitly directs the reader on how to rectify them. Any earlier passage contradicted by a latter one is simply superseded by the latter passage.
      • Earlier passages do teach a largely peaceful message, but these are superseded by a largely violent latter message. (The opposite of the Bible, where the Old Testament is more violent and the New Testament more peaceful.) It is the "moderate" Muslims who ignore this direction for reconciling contradictions.
    • Muslims are freely allowed to lie to infidel about the intent of Islam.
      • So the "moderate" Muslim "religion of peace" could just as easily be a lie, in full accordance with their scripture.
    • The Qur'an does teach of peace, but only after worldwide Sharia Law has been established, and by the violent means advocated in the latter passages of the Qur'an.
     
  19. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  20. Trooper Secular Sanity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    The main motivation has always been the us vs. them mentality.

    In four studies looking at six religions, including Islam and Judaism in the Middle East, researchers led by Jeremy Ginges, a psychologist at the New School for Social Research, New York, found that regular attendance of religious services — mosques or synagogues — sometimes led to a combination of willing martyrdom and out-group hostility, though regular prayer did not.

    He adds that whether a religious practice is negative or positive is directed by two factors: sense of connectedness to the idea or religious group, and the emotional paradigm in which this connection is made. "If the emotional tone is negative — i.e. people who don't believe what we believe are evil, we should kill people who believe differently — then the result is negative emotions such as fear and hatred, and outwardly destructive behaviors.


    http://www.natureasia.com/en/nmiddleeast/article/10.1038/nmiddleeast.2013.245
     
  21. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    I think that those two factors are basically one and the same.
     
  22. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    Not actually true. The original manuscripts were lost and then re-assembled through oral tradition over many decades by multiple authors. There is even more than one version of the Quran.
     
  23. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    It did originate from one man over the course of his lifetime.
    Compilation 20 years after Muhammad's death is hardly comparable to the hundreds of years taken to write, much less compile, the Bible. By today's lifespans, Muhammad could have lived to see the Quran compiled. Also, I am not sure one-step removed from first-hand witnesses qualifies as what most people would consider "oral tradition", which typically implies enough iterations to infer distortion. Variants have not shown significant differences.
     

Share This Page