Turkish PM (or dictator, if you prefer) Tayyip Erdogan insists there isn't. I agree with him:
Be your answer as it may, perhaps watching the attached video may make the truth a bit more...eh...evident. :-)
According to White people? There is none. They don't even know what Islam is.
Can you read this? I rest my case.
Islam (alebo nespisovne, ale často[pozn 1] islám, iné (zriedkavé) názvy: moslimstvo, mohamedánstvo, musulmanstvo[1], mohamedanizmus[2]; arab. الإسلام – al-islám – odovzdanie sa alebo podriadenie sa do vôle boha Alaha, podstatné meno slovesné od arabského slovesa aslama - podrobiť sa, odovzdať sa Bohu, dosiahnuť stav mieru)[3]) je monoteistické, univerzálne, abrahámovské náboženstvo, založené na učení proroka Mohameda, ktoré vyznáva viac ako 1,5 miliardy ľudí.[4] Vyznávači islamu (moslimovia) pokladajú svoje náboženstvo za prirodzenú monoteistickú vieru a poriadok daný Bohom už prvému človeku, Adamovi. Moslimovia veria, že túto Božiu vôľu zvestovali ľuďom proroci avšak až do vystúpenia posledného a najväčšieho z nich - Mohameda - zostávala úroveň poznania nízka, a túto dobu preto označujú za vek džáhilíje, "nevedomosti". S Mohamedom spojujú triumfálny nástup dovŕšeného islamu, zatiaľčo historická veda až tu, na počiatku 7. stor., zaznamenáva jeho vznik ako nového náboženstva.[5] Základná pradigma kladie dôraz na pevný životný poriadok, vyjadrený jasne formulovanými predstavami o svete a človeku v ňom a záväzným systémom právnych vzťahov k Bohu a noriem interakcie v spoločnosti (šaría). Pepožičiava relatívne zhodné rysy spoločnostiam, kde pôsobí ako väčšinové náboženstvo, ale aj v rámci menšinových komunít.[6]
At one time I was pretty much like every other westerner in that I operated under certain assumptions regarding Islam; chiefly that it was just another Abrahamic religion; that, like Christianity, it had comparatively 'peaceful' and 'belligerent' wings or sects, and that Muslims worshiped the same deity as Christians and Jews.
....And then I read the Qur'an from cover to cover. (I even ventured partially into the Hadith.) From that moment on I realized that all the bovine excrement being promulgated by politicians and the MSM alike was precisely that: bovine excrement.
"Believe nothing I say about Islam. Believe nothing which anyone else says about Islam. Read the Qur'an yourself and be duly repulsed."
I actively and fervently encourage everyone within eyeshot of this post (if not every single American) to read the Qur'an. Draw your own conclusions only AFTER having FULLY read the Qur'an. Don't take anyone's word for what it says. Be warned, however, that, if you consider yourself a child of a loving God, your faith WILL be sorely tested. That is especially so if you've fallen into the intellectual snare of believing the God of the Bible and 'allah' are one and the same. Hint: REGARDLESS of that which is promulgated by Islam, they are not.
Claiming there's no difference between ISIS and Islam as a whole is like claiming there's no difference between the FLDS and Vatican 2 Catholics.
According to the prime minister of Turkey there is none. I've no idea whether he'd be considered 'white' much less whether race is relevant in any way whatsoever to the posted question.
In short, you have no case to rest. Thanks for trying, though, Sharonna. :-)
Upon WHAT does ISIS base or seek to justify its actions?
Or to make the point a bit less cryptically, last I checked, neither FLDS members or Vatican 2 Catholics have or use SCRIPTURE to bolster barbarity. Your analogy is for chit.
BTW, you'll have to take the veracity of such claims up with the prime minister of Turkey. :-)
Well.....
First I would advise considering why Erdogan would say such a thing. 'Because he really thinks so' is of course possible, but I think unlikely. I believe he has made a distinction separating ISIS and 'other Islam' but it's 3 am and I'm not going to look for it now.
His party's and his own power rest, to a critical extent, to what the west might call, 'traditional' Muslims, who may well not like being termed 'moderate' at all. Thinking like that doesn't necessarily mean they're going shopping for ball bearings.
Since I wouldn't trust Erdogan as far as I could throw him, I would propose that it is for support from his own base that he might say such a thing, rather than any earth-shattering revelation on Islam itself.
"You are buying into standard xenophobic scaremongering."
LOL! So quick to cut loose with ad hominem that you failed to notice I haven't taken any position at all...other than to agree with a MUSLIM. Try again, l'il trooper!
"There is nothing so terrible in the Quran that you can't find an analogous sentiment in the Bible."
Really? Then you can find a biblical analogue to THESE:
LOL! Silly girl. Other than to AGREE with Tayyip Erdogan (a MUSLIM), I made no 'claim' whatsoever. Try again. It might help if you read MrWitch's response below. THAT is how you answer a QUES-TION.
THANK YOU!
FINALLY, someone responds with a topical answer to the question completely devoid of ad hominem/Islamic apologetics!
Fantastic post!
One could be forgiven, though, for coming away with the impression that one group or other (radicals or moderates) doesn't strictly adhere to Islamic scripture and thus aren't 'true Muslims.' This would explain why they're at each other's throats when they're not at ours. :-)
That seems especially true given that, in Islam, the latter verses of the Qur'an carry more weight than the former. (The doctrine of recency or some such.)
"She says, "No people of any faith follow all aspects of their faith."
This is important."
YES! Congratulations on your insight!
"Most people do not want war, including most of the Muslims living in our culture."
This is true, but is largely irrelevant if the ones who do want war are following the Qur'an as the moderates understand it.
"Many of them come to the West specifically because they like it's freedoms."
If this is true--and I believe it is--then it's high time they spoke up en masse. A handful do...but most don't.
My experience with Moderates has been exactly as the Gatestone Institute puts it.
I have found these moderate characteristics especially true of Sufis.
"I know this is out of the context of your original question here, however this is about your sayings other places, inside this question as inside other questions."
Very seldom do I take a stand on an issue at the instance of posting a question. This is the foremost reason why. Some people insist that I'm making some sort of claim or statement by merely asking a question. I normally endeavor to craft a question using neutral language and in as neutral a manner as possible, but invariably somebody, like the poster above, will direct the conversation toward me because they IMAGINE that I'm insinuating something which never crossed my mind! I do not wish to discuss me. If I did I'd put up a question ABOUT me. In any case, if come off as a bit defensive, this is why.
"Why the name calling, Nimitz?! Does it make you feel better, or feel your arguments are more valid?"
What name calling? Are you referring to my description of the Islamic concept of 'god' as a sadistic phuck? If so, then you should also know that I'm describing a CONCEPT: an IDEA in the heads of some. If they identify with that idea/concept, that's not my problem.
"One could say the same about radical Christians vs. moderate Christians."
Indeed, one could...assuming he or she could proffer an example whereby Christians judge one another's conformity to scripture on the basis of acts of barbarity. The closest you're gonna get would be the nutters at WBC condemning the rest of Christendom for not joining them in verbally hammering on gays. Christians don't normally settle doctrinal disputes by killing each other. Not since the Reformation, anyway. :-)
"As in politics and other aspects of life you'll find different ways of how to interpretate various issues, including such thing as the amendments in the US."
True, but in this case we're talking about internal disputes which end in bloodshed more often than not. The last time that would be applicable insofar as the U.S. is concerned would be 1860. (Note that I might have to remove this qualification after the election.)
As for the rest of your post, excellent point.
I do agree that it would be helpful if more moderates spoke up for peace on masse, and put more effort into publicising their positions.
I've been cruising the websites on Islam. There are debates going on within Islam. And it seems that when it comes to voicing a protest against radicals, some become suddenly quiet.
I am inclined to interpret this as fear.
I think someone who shows their face and name in public declaring against the radical position needs to have a means of protecting their lives by keeping their location secret. That could be a difficult choice and sometimes not a practical one.
To live one's entire life as Salman Rushdie has, for instance, must be a very difficult thing.
Somehow we need to find a safe way past this impasse - like helping to protect those who speak out.
Within our Western countries we do have laws and surveillance, and despite the terrorist attacks that occurred, many have been successfully foiled (72 in Australia.) Work has begun to successfully prevent and reverse the radicalization of disaffected youth. We now know how.
Aung San Suu Kyi, in her acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize, once said something I found very scary: that when someone is prepared to die to impose tyranny, the only way to oppose it is to be prepared to die for freedom. I am horribly afraid that she may be right.
The Yisidis in Syria have discovered that the ISIS warriors cannot bear to be killed by a woman. They believe that if a woman kills them they cannot go to Paradise. So the women are volunteering, getting trained as soldiers and going to war. I saw footage on Australian TV of ISIS warriors running away from female soldiers!
What a wonderful irony that women may prove to be the key to this global problem.
