Islam The Critical Stalemate re Violence in Islam

Joyousperson · Jun 14, 2019

JosephZ said:
While the article you linked is about the ethnicity of the perpetrators rather than religion, I will still address it.

The key words in the article you quoted are "A think tank has claimed." Just because they claim something, doesn't mean it's true.

The same article you linked provides information from more reliable sources that would lead one to question the think tank's claim.

CEOP research published in 2012 states 85 per cent of offenders found guilty of sexual activity with a minor in 2011 were white.

Another CEOP study released the following year found 75 per cent of offenders in grooming-gang cases were from Asian backgrounds, while 100 per cent in paedophile rings were white.

In an inquiry by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner in 2012, 36 per cent of victims of group or gang child abuse identified their attackers as white, 27 per cent as Asian, 16 per cent as black, with 16 per cent unspecified.

In my previous post I gave 20 examples of cases in the UK that would be considered grooming gangs and most of them involve non-Asian perpetrators. You can do a google search yourself and come to the same conclusion.

If we look at official reports on sex crimes in the UK, it is easy to see that the study done by that think tank is flawed.

Below are excerpts from reports released by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP):

2013

Ethnicity descriptors remain imprecise and as not all police forces responded to CEOP’s information request, the data is incomplete. Using broad groupings, all ethnicities were represented in the sample, however, a disproportionate number of offenders were reported as Asian. Of the 52 groups for which usable ethnicity data was provided, 26 (50%) comprised all Asian offenders, 11 (21%) all white offenders, 9 (17%) groups comprised offenders from multiple ethnicities, 4 (8%) comprised
all black offenders and there were 2 (4%) groups of exclusively Arab offenders. Of the 306 offenders whose ethnicity was provided for type 1 offending, a total of 75% were categorised as Asian, 17% were categorised as white, and the remaining 8% were categorised as black (5%) or Arab (3%). This is in contrast to those identified in type 2 group offending, who were reported as exclusively of white ethnicity.

2012

Where the ethnicity of perpetrators was provided, 545 were recorded as ‘White’, 415 were recorded as ‘Asian’, and 244 were recorded as ‘Black’.

View attachment 258164

2011

In relation to ethnicity, the data was often recorded to a particularly poor standard at the point of capture. ‘Ethnicity’ was often conflated with ‘nationality’ and neither factor captured according to a conventional or standardised classification scheme. Within the available dataset there was a significant difference between the groups. For groups one and two combined, the ethnicity of 38% of the offenders was unknown, 30% were white, 28% Asian, 3% Black and 0.16% Chinese. When only group one was analysed, the offenders were found to be 38% white, 32% unknown, 26% Asian, 3% Black, and 0.2% Chinese.

In the above reports the information on ethnicity of the perpetrators was extremely limited, but when you look at the total percentages of people who have been charged and convicted of sexual crimes in the UK of all types (Rape, sex with children, etc...), Asians represent only a small percentage

Demographic breakdowns of defendants prosecuted for sexual offences In 2011, males accounted for the vast majority of prosecutions for sexual offences (98.2 per cent). More specifically, males aged 18 and over accounted for 89.7 per cent of proceedings for sexual offences, with similar proportions for rape (89.6 percent) and sexual assault (89.2 per cent) proceedings (see Table 4.2). 9,042 defendants proceeded against for sexual offences in 2011 (91.2 per cent of total) were of a known ethnicity (see Table 4.4). Of these persons:

 78.0 per cent were White;
 9.9 per cent were Black;
 9.7 per cent were Asian;
 The remaining 2.4 per cent were of ‘other’ ethnicity.

Demographic breakdowns of offenders convicted for sexual offences In 2011, males accounted for the vast majority of offenders found guilty for sexual offences (99.0 per cent). More specifically, males aged 18 and over accounted for 91.8 per cent of offenders found guilty for sexual offences, with similar proportions for rape (94.0 per cent) and sexual assault (90.3 per cent) proceedings (see Table 4.8). 5,497 offenders found guilty of sexual offences in 2011 (92.0 per cent) were of a known ethnicity (see Table 4.10). Of these persons:

 80.9 per cent were White;
 7.6 per cent were Black;
 8.7 per cent were Asian;
 The remaining 2.8 per cent were of ‘other’ ethnicity.

When you compare the above percentages to the demographics of the UK, it shows that each group pretty much falls inline proportionally with the countries demographics.

80 per cent of the population were white British. Asian (Pakistani, Indian, Bangladeshi, other) ‘groups’ made up 6.8 per cent of the population; black groups 3.4 per cent; Chinese groups 0.7 cent, Arab groups 0.4 per cent and other groups 0.6 per cent.

While there is a slight difference in the percentages between perpetrators and citizens, this still tells us that Asians are not any more likely than any other group in the UK to commit sex crimes.

If you want to go one step further and look at all crime from petty theft to murder, you will find similar results.

View attachment 258163

So the bottom line, the study by the think tank found at the link you provided is flawed. Based on the limited official information that's available, there is no way that 84 per cent of people convicted of child grooming gang offences since 2005 until the time this study was released were Asian. Once again, you can do a google search yourself and filter the years and find that most cases involve white perpetrators.

What would cause this study to be in such error? Maybe it has to do where a large portion of their funding comes from.

A 2016 investigation found that Sam Harris, who has stated “we are war with Islam,” and supported the profiling of Muslims, gave Quilliam $20,000. Sam Harris and Quilliam’s head, Maajid Nawaz, also co-authored a book in 2015 called Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue.

The same investigation revealed that Quilliam “has received over a million dollars in funding from an American conservative philanthropic organisation, with close ties to the Tea Party and extreme right-wing Christian networks.”

In 2013, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation gave Quilliam $75,000. The Center for American Progress’s report, Fear, Inc. 2.0, lists the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation as part of the “Islamophobia network” as it also funds the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the Center for Security Policy.

Quilliam also received a grant totaling $1,080,997 from the John Templeton Foundation, covering the period from September 2014 to June 2017. A 2015 peer-reviewed study concluded that the Templeton Foundation was a “key player in the funding of right-wing organisations.”

I did not insist that report by Quilliam is final. It cannot be totally false. If it is not 84% but 50%, it is still bad.
However the evidence of so many Muslims being sentenced and supported by verses in the Quran and Ahadiths with supporting claims by scholars, it is very likely it has something to do with the ideology of Islam.
In addition, there is an element of political correctness as revealed by the Commission who investigated this specific groups and their crimes points to the religion of Islam.

Btw, the rapes by certain grooming gangs comprising Muslims is merely one supporting point. There are loads of evidences elsewhere over the history of Islam to support the point.

Note this critical point;
But the point here is the STALEMATE Dilemma inherent within Islam.
WHO ON EARTH can judge and insist those with the above views, Muslim men can rape non-Muslim is wrong?

Joyousperson · Jun 14, 2019

dzheremi said:
OP, I would be very careful about this kind of argumentation (in fact, I'd suggest you abandon it), both due to the lack of hard facts behind the statistics you are putting out there (with the exception of the Quilliam study, I take it; I don't know about the research group specifically, but I have seen them cited in mainstream British news, so I assume they are legitimate), and this idea of "Muslim names" and "looks" meaning that the people bearing those names or looks are inherently violent, or prone to violence, or whatever the point is.

I don't know how it is in China, where I will assume for the sake of argument that any Arabic name is likely adopted by a Muslim and is a mark of their Muslim-ness (as it is in the case of other multi-religious societies, like Ethiopia), but some of the names you are talking about as being "Muslim" are actually religiously neutral. Khalid, for instance, is more or less the Arabic version of "Charlie" or "Charles", and may be used by Christian and Muslim alike. Here is the Facebook page of a Christian priest apparently from Lebanon named Khalid Karomi. Iqbal also; it means "fortunate" in Arabic, but it is not generally associated with Arabs (not strictly so, anyway), since it is distinctly related to those with Pakistani or Persian origins (Urdu being a heavily Persianized and Arabized version of Hindu; most disinterested linguists claim them to be mutually intelligible, essentially the same language separated by the religion and culture of the speaker/writer -- i.e., when used by Hindus and other non-Muslims in India who write it in the Devanagari script, it is Hindi, but when used by Muslims of India, Pakistan, etc. and written in Perso-Arabic script with a large number of Persian and Arabic loanwords in it, it is Urdu).

That being so, we should not be surprised to find one of the most famous modern Pakistani Christians to have the name Iqbal Masih (Masih is Arabic -- and hence Persian, Urdu, etc. -- for "Messiah", referring to Jesus, used by people of all religions who speak those languages).

Regarding the looks...I mean, come on...aside from the guy on the top right in the last photo set with the obvious prayer spot on his head (from years of doing prostrations during Islamic prayer; it's weird, but my Egyptian friends tell me that the more fundamentalist Muslims in their country take it as a point of pride to have this, and so they try to make it as big as possible to show how pious they are), all of these people look like they could be members of my Church or another native Middle Eastern/North African church. Having a certain "look" doesn't make you a terrorist at all. Our clergy and monastics grow long beards, too, though not with the same motivation as the Muslims (obviously).

Are these all terrorists, because if you lined them up in mugshot type photos, they could look scary if you're not used to being around brown people or whatever? Well they're not. These are Coptic Christian (Egyptian) mourners at a funeral, carrying the coffin of the martyr Ghattas Atallah, one of the victims of an attack on a bus of worshipers headed to a monastery recently, if I remember correctly.

And men with scary beards! Look at all these!

These are all bishops of the Coptic Orthodox Church (the man in the center carriny the cross in his hand and a cane in the other is Pope Shenouda III, the then-Pope of the Church, r. 1971-2012), but if you take them out of that obvious environment, take off their robes and clerical turbans (a hold-over from the days of the Ottoman Empire, when each group was required to have distinctive dress from each other group so that the government could tell immediately by looking at you to which religion or sect you belonged; the Oriental Orthodox got turbans, I believe the Eastern Orthodox got fezzes, etc.), and place them against a plain background, they can also look scary and imposing.

So, again, please do not argue this way. You don't need to be racist to criticize Islam, and criticism of Islam is not in itself racist (since Islam is a religion practiced by all kinds of different ethnic and racial groups, not a race), but when you make your criticism about how these people over here look a certain way or have certain names, it certainly comes off as at least prejudiced against the people as people, rather than a critique of their religion. It is as a result ineffective, cruel, and only gives fuel to the people who would equate all critique of Islam with racism and criminal mindsets (as the Islamic bloc at the UN -- particularly Pakistan, actually -- has been trying to do for at least the last 20 years via proposed worldwide/UN enforced 'blasphemy laws' targeting criticism of Islam under the guise of preventing insult to millions of people).

Read the OP again.

The issue of rape and identity is not the main issue of the OP which is about the inherent STALEMATE DILEMMA which will happen with any and all the evil and violent acts committed by SOME [not all] from a potential pool of 20% or 320 million evil prone Muslims.

Read the OP again.

Joyousperson · Jun 15, 2019

JosephZ,

Here are the various evidence reinforcing the views that the specifically mentioned UK grooming gang were Muslims,

Here is a lists of the names of 300+ of the rapists.
We cannot be 100% but use your common sense to infer the likely religions of those named;

Grooming Gangs Jailed vs National Cover-Up — Culture and Politics for the 21st Century

The above is reinforced with the following admission by the BBC:

What was notable about this BBC documentary was that, for the first time, the establishment has admitted that these grooming gangs are primarily Muslim men.
The Ministry of Truth on the Muslim Rape Gangs — Culture and Politics for the 21st Century

The documentary;

BBC One - The Betrayed Girls

dzheremi · Jun 15, 2019

Joyousperson said:
Read the OP again.

I've read the OP. I'm not sure where you are getting your statistics (percentages of different types of Muslims).

The issue of rape and identity is not the main issue of the OP

I'm aware of that. I was responding mostly to the claims you made in post #16, which were about identity, and made several false and/or dangerous claims.

JosephZ · Jun 15, 2019

Joyousperson said:
One.

They made it clear that because I was a non-Muslim, and not a virgin, and because I didn’t dress “modestly”, that they believed I deserved to be “punished”. They said I had to “obey” or be beaten.
...
As someone who has experienced life inside a grooming gang, I can tell you with certainty that none of this is likely to make any difference to the behaviours of groomers. Like terrorists, they firmly believe that the crimes they carry out are justified by their religious beliefs.
As a Rotherham grooming gang survivor, I want people to know about the religious extremism which inspired my abusers

This girl who was a victim also said the following in that article.

The problem isn’t the text itself; it’s how it’s fundamentally interpreted. In fact, there are many cases of Bible quotes being used to justify terrible human injustices, like the enslavement of people from Africa, antisemitism and violence towards LGBT+ people.

All the major world religions, including Hinduism and Buddhism, have also at some time been associated with extreme human rights abuses against men, women and children.

I experienced horrific, religiously sanctioned sexual violence and torture – so I definitely believe that we need to be aware of religious extremism as something potentially harmful, so that we can protect people from it.

But for Tommy Robinson and his followers to focus on an entire religion, based on the cruel interpretations of some scriptures by some people, is unhelpful, to say the least. Many of his religious theories and conjecture are not anything that I can relate to in my real life experiences.

Most grooming gang survivors I know absolutely condemn anti-Islamic hate...

This victim said exactly what I have been telling you all along in every one of these threads you have started. It's not the religion or the religious texts that are the problem, it's the extremists who pervert them.

Attempting to exploit the issue of child sexual abuse in the UK to push an anti-Islamic agenda is in very poor taste; especially since roughly 80% of perpetrators of this crime in that country are white non-Muslims.

Joyousperson said:
Islamic scholar ‘says Allah allows Muslim men to RAPE non-Muslim women to humiliate them'
Islamic scholar ‘says Allah allows Muslim men to RAPE non-Muslim women to humiliate them'
No Islamic scholar would dare to invent their own views on Islam else it is hell for them. Thus the view of the scholar above had came from the Quran and Ahadith. I won't go into the details of the verses.

That headline is very misleading. Let's look at what she says.

“Those whom you own” (slavery) existed before Islam. It existed among all nations and countries, not just among pre-Islam Arabs. Anyone could trade in freeborn men and women. This is called the selling of freeborn people. It’s like the selling of human organs and trafficking in freeborn humans today.

But when Islam emerged it put (slavery) into order, by limiting it to legitimate wars between Muslims and their enemies.

If we fought Israel, which is plundering land, and is an aggressor against people and their faith… Obviously it is impossible that we fight Israel, even though Surah Al-Isra in the Quran foretells this, and nothing is beyond the power of Allah…

The female prisoners of war are “those whom you own”. In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives.

Some opportunists and extremists, who only harm Islam, say: “I will bring a woman from East Asia, as (a slave girl) under the status of ‘those whom you own,’ and with the consent of my wife, I will allocate this woman a room in the house, and will have sex with her as a slave girl”.

This is nonsense. This is not prescribed in Islam at all. Islam says that a woman (with whom sex is permitted) is either a wife or a slave girl. Legitimately owned slaves come from among prisoners from a war, which is waged against the Muslims, a war to plunder land, a war against our faith, and so on.

What some people are doing now is an aggression against Allah, and against Allah’s legal texts in the Quran, and we must not be influenced by this at all.

As can be seen she is condemning Muslims who are using Islam as an excuse to rape or make non-Muslims sex slaves which is a good thing. Unfortunately in this short clip she doesn't condemn slavery in that video and even says that if there was a defensive war involving Israel, "The female prisoners of war are “those whom you own”. In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives."

Since we have no idea what she was saying before or after what is available, it's quite possible that she also condemned those practices. Keep in mind we are only seeing a snip-it of what was probably a much longer recording. Also you have to consider the source of this video.

First the source of the misleading headline:

The Daily Express is a British right wing tabloid newspaper that routinely utilizes sensational headlines such as this: NATO TERRIFIED: Trump may ‘seriously undermine’ alliance in Putin meeting – world on ALERT. Articles are typically written by journalist or correspondents and are reasonably sourced to credible information. However, like many tabloids the Daily Express also publishes conspiracy and pseudoscience articles such as these: ‘Portal OPENS’ above New Jersey with some fearing it’s a sign of PLANET X and Could this strange corpse be the world’s first proof aliens have visited Earth?

The paper’s editorial stances have often been seen as aligned to the UK Independence Party (UKIP), Euroscepticism and many other right-wing factions including the right-wing of the Conservative Party.

A factual search reveals a few failed fact checks via IFCN fact checkers.

Overall, we rate the Daily Express Right Biased based on editorial content and Mixed for factual reporting due to publishing conspiracies & pseudoscience as well as a few failed fact checks. (7/19/2016)

And second the source of the video.

Middle East Media Research Institute

Bias: Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy

Notes: Founded in February 1998, according to it’s about page, MEMRI or Middle East Media Research Institute states its purpose as distributing English translations of Middle Eastern media. MEMRI describes itself as “Independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501(c)3 organization” and they state that they cover “original analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural, and religious trends.”

MEMRI is based in Washington DC and its founder is a former Israeli military intelligence officer Yigal Carmon. Memri also launched MEMRI TV news channel which is described by Know your Meme as “the channel has gained much notoriety for its absurd translations of news programs, many of which have spawned photoshops of screenshots showing false or edited subtitles.”

According to Source Watch “Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is a Israeli propaganda organization that selectively translates materials from the Arab/Muslim/Iranian press purportedly demonstrating hostility against Israel/Jews.”

In review, the articles on MEMRI are supposedly direct translations from other languages, however almost all translation favor Israel and denigrate Muslims. According to The Guardian, MEMRI is a pro-Israel propaganda site.

Overall, we rate MEMRI a Questionable source based on biased story selection that always favors Israel. (M. Huitsing 3/24/2018) Updated (11/19/2018)

I would take that article with a grain of salt.

Joyousperson said:
the evidence of so many Muslims being sentenced and supported by verses in the Quran and Ahadiths with supporting claims by scholars, it is very likely it has something to do with the ideology of Islam.

How many is so many? Thousands? Out of a population of 2.6 million plus in the UK? And of those thousands, how many committing these crimes actually used their religion to justify their actions?

Joyousperson said:
Here is a lists of the names of 300+ of the rapists. We cannot be 100% but use your common sense to infer the likely religions of those named;

Regardless of the religion of those individuals, it doesn't change the fact that most perpetrators of child sex crimes in the UK are white non-Muslims. In the study below, for the 14 month period stated, white men were responsible for the most gang and group related sex crimes against children. Similar stats are shown in other reports as well as I showed earlier.

The evidence and data collected to inform the findings of this report is the most thorough and comprehensive collection of information on child sexual exploitation collected to date in England.

Period covered: August 2010-October 2011.

Where the ethnicity of perpetrators was provided, 545 were recorded as ‘White’, 415 were recorded as ‘Asian’, and 244 were recorded as ‘Black’.

Once again, these studies are about ethnicity, not religion. Many of those falling into the category of Asian would not be Muslims.

Joyousperson said:
The above is reinforced with the following admission by the BBC: What was notable about this BBC documentary was that, for the first time, the establishment has admitted that these grooming gangs are primarily Muslim men.

Did you watch the documentary?

Joyousperson · Jun 15, 2019

dzheremi said:
I've read the OP. I'm not sure where you are getting your statistics (percentages of different types of Muslims).

Here is my thesis;

EVIL = any act that is negative to the well-being of the individual and humanity ranging from lying [low] to genocide [high].

DNA wise 100% of ALL humans are embedded with the potential to commit EVIL.
20% of ALL humans are born with an active propensity to commit evil [as defined].
Therefore conservatively, 20%* of all Muslims [humans] has an active propensity to commit evil.

Why 20%?
Research have shown the majority of people, say 60-80% will lie [low evil] regularly.
Therefore to infer 20% of people have a tendency to commit a range of evil from medium evil [violence, serious crimes, rape, murder] to 'high' evil, e.g. genocides, mass murders, mass rapes, and the likes.

Agree?

I'm aware of that. I was responding mostly to the claims you made in post #16, which were about identity, and made several false and/or dangerous claims.

As I had stated I am giving these views of mine a low confidence level due to available but insufficient evidences.

Joyousperson · Jun 15, 2019

JosephZ said:
This girl who was a victim also said the following in that article.

The problem isn’t the text itself; it’s how it’s fundamentally interpreted. In fact, there are many cases of Bible quotes being used to justify terrible human injustices, like the enslavement of people from Africa, antisemitism and violence towards LGBT+ people.

All the major world religions, including Hinduism and Buddhism, have also at some time been associated with extreme human rights abuses against men, women and children.

I experienced horrific, religiously sanctioned sexual violence and torture – so I definitely believe that we need to be aware of religious extremism as something potentially harmful, so that we can protect people from it.

But for Tommy Robinson and his followers to focus on an entire religion, based on the cruel interpretations of some scriptures by some people, is unhelpful, to say the least. Many of his religious theories and conjecture are not anything that I can relate to in my real life experiences.

Most grooming gang survivors I know absolutely condemn anti-Islamic hate...

This victim said exactly what I have been telling you all along in every one of these threads you have started. It's not the religion or the religious texts that are the problem, it's the extremists who pervert them.

Attempting to exploit the issue of child sexual abuse in the UK to push an anti-Islamic agenda is in very poor taste; especially since roughly 80% of perpetrators of this crime in that country are white non-Muslims.

As I had stated the 100% of rapes via child grooming need to be categorized in their justifiable major categories, which is Muslim and non-Muslim related.

Regardless what other points the victim above stated, she did confirm there are a religious link, i.e. Islam from her rapist.

Taking other factors related to Islam is such a situation, this point should not be ignored.

That headline is very misleading. Let's look at what she says.

“Those whom you own” (slavery) existed before Islam. It existed among all nations and countries, not just among pre-Islam Arabs. Anyone could trade in freeborn men and women. This is called the selling of freeborn people. It’s like the selling of human organs and trafficking in freeborn humans today.

But when Islam emerged it put (slavery) into order, by limiting it to legitimate wars between Muslims and their enemies.

If we fought Israel, which is plundering land, and is an aggressor against people and their faith… Obviously it is impossible that we fight Israel, even though Surah Al-Isra in the Quran foretells this, and nothing is beyond the power of Allah…

The female prisoners of war are “those whom you own”. In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives.

Some opportunists and extremists, who only harm Islam, say: “I will bring a woman from East Asia, as (a slave girl) under the status of ‘those whom you own,’ and with the consent of my wife, I will allocate this woman a room in the house, and will have sex with her as a slave girl”.

This is nonsense. This is not prescribed in Islam at all. Islam says that a woman (with whom sex is permitted) is either a wife or a slave girl. Legitimately owned slaves come from among prisoners from a war, which is waged against the Muslims, a war to plunder land, a war against our faith, and so on.

What some people are doing now is an aggression against Allah, and against Allah’s legal texts in the Quran, and we must not be influenced by this at all.

As can be seen she is condemning Muslims who are using Islam as an excuse to rape or make non-Muslims sex slaves which is a good thing. Unfortunately in this short clip she doesn't condemn slavery in that video and even says that if there was a defensive war involving Israel, "The female prisoners of war are “those whom you own”. In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives."

Since we have no idea what she was saying before or after what is available, it's quite possible that she also condemned those practices. Keep in mind we are only seeing a snip-it of what was probably a much longer recording. Also you have to consider the source of this video.

Again this will end up into a 'she say, they say' contention.

Note she agreed of rape with 'prisoners of war' as commanded in the Quran. This itself is immoral within a holy text.

Note again, WHO IS SHE to judge other Muslims, where only Allah can judge?

As such, we will end up with STALEMATE where the Quran does influence and inspire a certain group of Muslims to commit evil and violence and no one on Earth can do anything about it on a theological basis.

First the source of the misleading headline:

The Daily Express is a British right wing tabloid newspaper that routinely utilizes sensational headlines such as this: NATO TERRIFIED: Trump may ‘seriously undermine’ alliance in Putin meeting – world on ALERT. Articles are typically written by journalist or correspondents and are reasonably sourced to credible information. However, like many tabloids the Daily Express also publishes conspiracy and pseudoscience articles such as these: ‘Portal OPENS’ above New Jersey with some fearing it’s a sign of PLANET X and Could this strange corpse be the world’s first proof aliens have visited Earth?

The paper’s editorial stances have often been seen as aligned to the UK Independence Party (UKIP), Euroscepticism and many other right-wing factions including the right-wing of the Conservative Party.

A factual search reveals a few failed fact checks via IFCN fact checkers.

Overall, we rate the Daily Express Right Biased based on editorial content and Mixed for factual reporting due to publishing conspiracies & pseudoscience as well as a few failed fact checks. (7/19/2016)

And second the source of the video.

Middle East Media Research Institute

Bias: Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy

Notes: Founded in February 1998, according to it’s about page, MEMRI or Middle East Media Research Institute states its purpose as distributing English translations of Middle Eastern media. MEMRI describes itself as “Independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501(c)3 organization” and they state that they cover “original analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural, and religious trends.”

MEMRI is based in Washington DC and its founder is a former Israeli military intelligence officer Yigal Carmon. Memri also launched MEMRI TV news channel which is described by Know your Meme as “the channel has gained much notoriety for its absurd translations of news programs, many of which have spawned photoshops of screenshots showing false or edited subtitles.”

According to Source Watch “Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is a Israeli propaganda organization that selectively translates materials from the Arab/Muslim/Iranian press purportedly demonstrating hostility against Israel/Jews.”

In review, the articles on MEMRI are supposedly direct translations from other languages, however almost all translation favor Israel and denigrate Muslims. According to The Guardian, MEMRI is a pro-Israel propaganda site.

Overall, we rate MEMRI a Questionable source based on biased story selection that always favors Israel. (M. Huitsing 3/24/2018) Updated (11/19/2018)

I would take that article with a grain of salt.

As usual you will rely on third party who oppose those sites.

Note it is very typical, like what is going on with the Republican versus the Democrats where each party will only side those who support their views and condemn those who disagree with their views. The parties involved will not bother about the truth and objective, though I note the Republicans are more objective than the irrational Democrats and their supporters.

Don't insult your intelligence by merely reading the views of opponents of any issue. You MUST adopt the objective approach and do a fact check on the relevant issue.

How many is so many? Thousands? Out of a population of 2.6 million plus in the UK? And of those thousands, how many committing these crimes actually used their religion to justify their actions?

I believe most of the rapists who were identified as Muslims were basically driven by an uncontrollable lust.
What happened in addition is their ideology of Islam [verses, the prophet as exemplar, supremacist, etc.] provide them a way to cover their personal crime and the confidence to commit more of the rapes.

Regardless of the religion of those individuals, it doesn't change the fact that most perpetrators of child sex crimes in the UK are white non-Muslims. In the study below, for the 14 month period stated, white men were responsible for the most gang and group related sex crimes against children. Similar stats are shown in other reports as well as I showed earlier.

The evidence and data collected to inform the findings of this report is the most thorough and comprehensive collection of information on child sexual exploitation collected to date in England.

Period covered: August 2010-October 2011.

View attachment 258224

Where the ethnicity of perpetrators was provided, 545 were recorded as ‘White’, 415 were recorded as ‘Asian’, and 244 were recorded as ‘Black’.

Once again, these studies are about ethnicity, not religion. Many of those falling into the category of Asian would not be Muslims.

Did you watch the documentary?

If you read the reports from the authorities' findings, there is a distinct pattern that differentiate the grooming-rapes by those identified as Muslims from the general grooming-rapes. Note one feature, i.e. the climate of political correctness that is accorded to anything to do with Islam.

I did not see the full documentary but relied on the statement, the BBC mentioned "Muslims".
I stand to be corrected on this if wrong.

Joyousperson · Jun 15, 2019

JosephZ,

Here is one specific book written on the "UK grooming-rape gangs by Muslims".

EASY MEAT
Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery
https://www.mensenhandelweb.nl/syst...sm-Islam-and-Child-Sex-Slavery-05-03-2014.pdf

The implication of Islam as a factor the grooming-rape issue is discussed in these chapters;

5. Systemic Institutional Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5.1 Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.2 Local Councils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
5.3 Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
5.4 Criminal Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
5.5 Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre . 136
5.6 Serious Organised Crime Agency . . . . . . . . . 151
5.7 Children’s Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
5.8 Home Affairs Select Committee . . . . . . . . . 173
5.9 Barnardo’s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
5.10 Academic Experts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

6. Abuse of the Narrative of Racism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
6.1 Political Correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
6.2 Muslims, not “Asians” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
6.3 “Racism” Protected the Rapists . . . . . . . . . . 206
6.4 Racist Aspects of Grooming . . . . . . . . . . . . 214

7. Islamic Cultural Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
7.1 “Asian gang”: racist duplicity . . . . . . . . . . . 223
7.2 Islamic Morality, Muslim Culture . . . . . . . . . 232
7.3 Koranic Instructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
7.4 Stories from the Hadith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
7.5 The Life of Mohammed (Sira) . . . . . . . . . . . 248
7.6 Sharia Law: Child Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
7.7 Sharia Law: Legality of Slavery . . . . . . . . . . 255

Joyousperson · Jun 16, 2019

Back to the OP, i.e. re the STALEMATE DILEMMA

In May 2013, Michael Adebolajo killed Lee Rigby and hacked off his head in London. When Adebolajo was charged in court it was reported;

A man has admitted killing soldier Lee Rigby but said it was not murder because "I am a soldier of Allah" and "this is a war".
Michael Adebolajo, 28, described the killing as a "military operation".
Rigby killer 'a soldier of Allah'

He told the court: "My religion is everything.
"When I came to Islam I realised that... real success is not just what you can acquire, but really is if you make it to paradise, because then you can relax," he added.

After killing the innocent man [not on official duty] Michael Adebolajo passed to a bystander a note.

It read: ‘To my beloved children know that to fight Allah’s enemies is an obligation. The proofs of which are so numerous that but a handful of any of them cuts out the bewitching tongues of the Munafiqeen.
....
.....

and therein quoting the following verses in groups 1-4 to justify his evil and violent acts;

1. 4:69-76, 4:84, 9:41
2. 9:24, 9:39, 9:46, 9:87, 9:93
3. 9:67, 3:173, 47:20, 9:86, 9:31, 9:51-5, 8:5-6, 2:170
4. 3:160, 9:119, 9:123
5. 9:37, 2:216, 3:142

As we can see, the Quran in its whole context do influence and inspire SOME Muslims to commit terrible evil and violent acts upon innocent non-Muslims merely they are disbelievers and/or is a threat is some ways to Islam.

The STALEMATE DILEMMA is no human on earth can judge and insist those who are influenced to commit evil and violent acts using the verses in the Quran are wrong.

Only Allah can judge but there is no way Allah will appear to confirm which is right or wrong.
Btw, it is well argued what the Quran [Allah words] state literally is right.

As one will note from the above, the STALEMATE DILEMMA is inherent within the Quran as representing the core ideology of Islam.
If Allah had stated without qualification;

"Love your enemies, Do not kill any human under any circumstances"

then we can interpret with 100% certainty Islam is a religion of peace.

In contrast note the pacifist religion of Christian, where there is an overriding pacifist maxim, i.e.
the unconditional "love all - even enemies" within the Gospels of Jesus Christ.
There is an overriding pacifist maxim within Buddhism, Jainism.

Therefore it is critical that humanity must be aware of this factual inherent STALEMATE DILEMMA within the core of Islam that cannot stop Muslims [SOME -zealous] from committing terrible evil and violent acts upon non-Muslims.

Therefrom humanity need to come up with effective solutions to resolve this inherent STALEMATE DILEMMA.

JosephZ · Jun 16, 2019

Joyousperson said:
Here is one specific book written on the "UK grooming-rape gangs by Muslims".
EASY MEAT
Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery
https://www.mensenhandelweb.nl/syst...sm-Islam-and-Child-Sex-Slavery-05-03-2014.pdf
The implication of Islam as a factor the grooming-rape issue is discussed in these chapters;

The author of that book, Peter McLoughlin, is a notorious right wing extremists who hates Muslims and immigrants (I will not link to them, but you can visit his social media accounts for evidence of this). Hardly an objective source or someone you would expect to get the truth from on the subject of UK grooming gangs. I provided you with official UK government sources, so you can either believe them or not.

Joyousperson said:
In May 2013, Michael Adebolajo killed Lee Rigby and hacked off his head in London. When Adebolajo was charged in court it was reported;

A man has admitted killing soldier Lee Rigby but said it was not murder because "I am a soldier of Allah" and "this is a war".
Michael Adebolajo, 28, described the killing as a "military operation".
Rigby killer 'a soldier of Allah'

Joyousperson said:
He told the court: "My religion is everything.
"When I came to Islam I realised that... real success is not just what you can acquire, but really is if you make it to paradise, because then you can relax," he added.
After killing the innocent man [not on official duty] Michael Adebolajo passed to a bystander a note.
It read: ‘To my beloved children know that to fight Allah’s enemies is an obligation. The proofs of which are so numerous that but a handful of any of them cuts out the bewitching tongues of the Munafiqeen.

Joyousperson said:
and therein quoting the following verses in groups 1-4 to justify his evil and violent acts;
1. 4:69-76, 4:84, 9:41
2. 9:24, 9:39, 9:46, 9:87, 9:93
3. 9:67, 3:173, 47:20, 9:86, 9:31, 9:51-5, 8:5-6, 2:170
4. 3:160, 9:119, 9:123
5. 9:37, 2:216, 3:142

On April 27, 2019, John Earnest, a Christian terrorist who said he was inspired by Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, and Martin Luther fired shots inside the Chabad of Poway synagogue in Poway, California killing one and injuring three others. Earnest wrote a seven-page letter before the shooting outlining his motives. Below are some excerpts from that letter.

Just because someone calls themselves a Christian does not make them one... Beyond the scope of time the Father and the Son made a covenant in eternity—that the Son would bring a people to Him that He may be glorified through them. I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me. And the Spirit keeps me... ...[They] take one quote from the Bible and grossly twist its meaning to serve their own evil purposes—meanwhile ignoring the encompassing history and context of the entire Bible and the wisdom it takes to apply God’s law in a broken world... A child can understand the concept of self-defense. It is unlawful and cowardly to stand on the sidelines as the European people are genocided around you... The Jew has forced our hand, and our response is completely justified. My God does not take kindly to the destruction of His creation... My God understands why I did what I did.

“When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matthew 27:24-25).

“I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham […] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not” (John 8:37-45).

“For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins away: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost” (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16).

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9).

“Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee” (Revelation 3:9).

There is no love without hatred. You cannot love God if you do not hate Satan. You cannot love righteousness if you do not also hate sin.

To my brothers in Christ of all races. Be strong... remember that you are secure in Christ.

Joyousperson said:
As we can see, the Quran in its whole context do influence and inspire SOME Muslims to commit terrible evil and violent acts upon innocent non-Muslims merely they are disbelievers and/or is a threat is some ways to Islam.

As we can see, the Bible in its whole context does influence and inspire SOME Christians to commit terrible evil and violent acts upon innocent non-Christians merely because they are Jews and/or are a threat in some way to White European Christians.

Both my statement and yours are true. There is no difference between these two extremists. They both perverted the religion they claim to follow and used their holy books to justify their evil acts.

Joyousperson said:
If Allah had stated without qualification;
"Love your enemies, Do not kill any human under any circumstances"then we can interpret with 100% certainty Islam is a religion of peace.

I showed you before where Islam teaches the exact same thing, but because of your gross misunderstanding of abrogation and how it applies to the Qur'an and what Islam teaches from other religious texts such as the hadiths, you choose to ignore this. When examples like the one I gave above are given you always come back with something like:

Joyousperson said:
Christianity has an overriding pacifist maxim of love all, even one's enemies, give the other cheeks and the likes. This mean Christianity per se do not condone Christian killing any one. Therefore we cannot blame Christianity for the crimes of Christians.

Joyousperson said:
Christians has a watertight defense against any accusations that Christianity is evil and violent in nature.

This defense for acts of terrorism and atrocities carried out by Christian extremists you keep repeating is complete garbage. This may be what you believe, but it's not preventing Christian extremists from doing the exact same thing Islamic extremists are doing. You want to put all the blame on Islam and make a direct tie between the perpetrators and the religion for Islamic related violence, while at the same time distance Christianity from the perpetrators of Christian related violence. This is not being objective, nor is it using fair judgement. To paraphrase Dr. Bale from the other thread you started "Islamic extremism, including jihadism, is inconceivable without reference to Islam, just as Christian extremism, including Christian terrorism, is inconceivable without reference to Christianity."

Both Christianity and Islam have been corrupted and/or distorted from their original teachings and intent by individuals, groups, and governments to justify all types of atrocities throughout their histories. In fact, Christianity has had a bloodier history than Islam whether the anti-Islamic propaganda sites you visit tell you that or not. You seriously need to learn the differences between religions and what they teach and religious extremist and what they teach. You are not helping anyone at all by equating the religion of Islam with Islamic extremism and posting anti-Islamic propaganda and links to anti-Islamic propaganda sites online.

JosephZ · Jun 16, 2019

Joyousperson said:
Here is my thesis;

EVIL = any act that is negative to the well-being of the individual and humanity ranging from lying [low] to genocide [high].

DNA wise 100% of ALL humans are embedded with the potential to commit EVIL.
20% of ALL humans are born with an active propensity to commit evil [as defined].
Therefore conservatively, 20%* of all Muslims [humans] has an active propensity to commit evil.
Why 20%?
Research have shown the majority of people, say 60-80% will lie [low evil] regularly.
Therefore to infer 20% of people have a tendency to commit a range of evil from medium evil [violence, serious crimes, rape, murder] to 'high' evil, e.g. genocides, mass murders, mass rapes, and the likes.

Agree?

While I agree that anyone is capable of committing an evil act, I disagree with your statement that 20% of all humans are born with an active propensity to commit evil. Despite every individual’s background, social situation, and psychological health being different, I believe all things considered, the potential to commit evil exists across the board to all people (100%). I wouldn't single out a population of 20% as I believe any individual, including myself, is capable of committing a violent act under certain circumstances. In fact, I have committed acts of violence towards others in the past.

I believe this also to be true of radicalization to the point that an individual or a group of people could be responsible for acts of violence on a large scale such as genocides and mass murders. Factors such as inequality, injustice, discrimination, and even foreign policy can lead someone to reach such a point. It all comes down to the environment a person is brought up in and what type of support system they have in their life.

Joyousperson said:
Regardless what other points the victim above stated, she did confirm there are a religious link, i.e. Islam from her rapist.

But she made a clear distinction between the religion of Islam and Islamic extremism.

Joyousperson said:
Again this will end up into a 'she say, they say' contention. Note she agreed of rape with 'prisoners of war' as commanded in the Quran. This itself is immoral within a holy text.

We will probably never know one way or the other without hearing the entirety of her lecture, but it still doesn't change the fact that the headline is intentionally misleading. She never says that rape with prisoners of war is acceptable, in fact, she never uses the term rape. Here is what she said "he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives."

Sex like someone has with their wife would be consensual. Islam teaches that sex must be consensual and rape is punishable by death, so she is still not talking about rape in this case.

Joyousperson said:
As usual you will rely on third party who oppose those sites.
Don't insult your intelligence by merely reading the views of opponents of any issue. You MUST adopt the objective approach and do a fact check on the relevant issue.

I posted those links showing where those sites are not always reliable because I wanted to go beyond just me saying that. They were supporting evidence to my claim. I don't need a third party to tell me if a certain source is credible or not, because I can make those calls on my own.

Since you don't believe me or the source that I provided, let me show you a couple of examples from here in the Philippines that will prove to you without a shadow of doubt that the Daily Express is not a trustworthy site.

Express UK report:

Horror as ISIS gunmen storm tourist resort in Philippines terror attack – explosions heard
ISIS GUNMEN attacked guests at a popular tourist hotspot in the Philippines, injuring dozens of tourists, according to reports.
By BELINDA ROBINSON
PUBLISHED: 18:52, Thu, Jun 1, 2017
Horror as ISIS gunmen storm tourist resort in Philippines terror attack – explosions heard

Pretty scary story right?

The true story:

No terror attack, no ISIS; only a single gunman with personal financial problems.

Resorts World gunman identified as Jessie Javier Carlos

National Capital Region Police Office chief identified him as Jessie Javier Carlos, 42, a former employee of the Department of Finance stationed at the One Stop Shop. The suspect was identified as a Filipino national contrary to reports that he could be a foreigner because of his looks. Carlos was fired from his job for non-declaration/misdeclaration of his statements, assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

“On this note, we also reiterate our prior statements that this is not an act of terrorism but this incident is confined to the act of one man alone as we have always said,” he said, reiterating that they won’t allow people or any threat group to use this situation to advance their propaganda.-- NCRPO Director Oscar Albayalde
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/90250...ntified-as-jessie-javier-carlos#ixzz5r25gk5Mt

Again the Express UK Headline:

Boxing match blasts leaves 10 dead and injures 20 in Philippines
TEN people have died and at least 20 are injured after two explosions at a boxing match in the Philippines.
By LAURA MOWAT
PUBLISHED: 07:37, Thu, Dec 29, 2016
Boxing match blasts leaves 10 dead and injures 20 in Philippines

Ten dead?

The true story:

No deaths resulted from the bombing.

34 hurt in Leyte town plaza blast

HILONGOS, Leyte: At least 34 persons watching an amateur boxing bout were injured in an explosion at the town plaza here Wednesday night. Initially, 34 were injured. Most of them have been confined at the Hilongos District Hospital and Leyte Baptist Hospital.

At least four victims were referred to the Eastern Visayas Regional Medical Center (EVRMC) in Tacloban City and one to the Living Hope Hospital in Maasin City in Southern Leyte. Most of the victims suffered foot injuries.
34 hurt in Leyte town plaza blast | The Manila Times Online

Remember I also pointed out examples from here in the Philippines that can be found on the religionofpeace website that were untrue.

So I have to ask you, if these sources will mislead their readers even once, or better yet multiple times as I have shown, why should anything they claim be trusted?

Joyousperson said:
I did not see the full documentary but relied on the statement, the BBC mentioned "Muslims".
I stand to be corrected on this if wrong.

The documentary focused on the race of the perpetrators, however, their religion was mentioned in regard to how right wing groups would react to the story and how they would use these attacks to further their agendas.

Joyousperson said:
Your point has no significance at all.
In that case, anything written anywhere that is in agreement with what is written in the Quran will be accepted.
This will include the anti-semitism that is included in the Mein Kampf of Hitler which led to the genocides of the Jews.

No, it only applies to the Jewish and Christian religious texts and the spoken words of the prophets found in them.

Joyousperson said:
Nevertheless, it is very odd that this particular point among 5:3 which mentioned 'food' should the last point spoken by Muhammad to his listeners.

There are several verses after that one that were revealed to Muhammad, but interestingly enough, the distinctions between clean and unclean food were one of the last things Moses mentions in the Torah (The Five Books of Moses). This is found in the 14th chapter of the final book. There's still quite a bit after that, but it's still near the end.

Joyousperson · Jun 16, 2019

JosephZ said:
The author of that book, Peter McLoughlin, is a notorious right wing extremists who hates Muslims and immigrants (I will not link to them, but you can visit his social media accounts for evidence of this). Hardly an objective source or someone you would expect to get the truth from on the subject of UK grooming gangs. I provided you with official UK government sources, so you can either believe them or not.

Did Peter McLoughlin admit he is right wing or is that a label thrown at him by his opponents?

Note I stated one must have intellectual integrity in being objective and support one's views with evidence.
I have read his book and he quoted the appropriate references including from official UK government sources to support his views.

On April 27, 2019, John Earnest, a Christian terrorist who said he was inspired by Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, and Martin Luther fired shots inside the Chabad of Poway synagogue in Poway, California killing one and injuring three others. Earnest wrote a seven-page letter before the shooting outlining his motives. Below are some excerpts from that letter.

Just because someone calls themselves a Christian does not make them one... Beyond the scope of time the Father and the Son made a covenant in eternity—that the Son would bring a people to Him that He may be glorified through them. I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me. And the Spirit keeps me... ...[They] take one quote from the Bible and grossly twist its meaning to serve their own evil purposes—meanwhile ignoring the encompassing history and context of the entire Bible and the wisdom it takes to apply God’s law in a broken world... A child can understand the concept of self-defense. It is unlawful and cowardly to stand on the sidelines as the European people are genocided around you... The Jew has forced our hand, and our response is completely justified. My God does not take kindly to the destruction of His creation... My God understands why I did what I did.

“When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matthew 27:24-25).

“I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham […] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not” (John 8:37-45).

“For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins away: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost” (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16).

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9).

“Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee” (Revelation 3:9).

There is no love without hatred. You cannot love God if you do not hate Satan. You cannot love righteousness if you do not also hate sin.

To my brothers in Christ of all races. Be strong... remember that you are secure in Christ.

As we can see, the Bible in its whole context does influence and inspire SOME Christians to commit terrible evil and violent acts upon innocent non-Christians merely because they are Jews and/or are a threat in some way to White European Christians.

This is the usual 'what about' tu quoque fallacy.

Note if Christianity objectively condone violence then we must condemn Christianity.

Note his views;

I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me.

The above is wrong.
God and Jesus made an offer in John 3:16 to accept and to believe in Jesus Christ, thus God's message.
The obligation is on the person to choose and be accepted as a Christian within a personal covenant with the Christian God.
The Old Covenant in the OT and new in NT are merely general covenants not specific covenant to bind one with God as a Christian.

To be a Christian-proper he has to accept the offer by Jesus Christ which would imply establishing a covenant to comply with covenanted terms.
The covenanted terms included an overriding pacifist maxim of love all - even enemies.
That the John Earnest killed his enemies meant he is not acting in the name of Christianity because Christianity prohibit killing one's enemies but rather to love them.

This demonstrate that the Christian God is an intelligent and wise God that it included that overriding pacifist maxim of "love all - even enemies" to protect itself 100% from being accused of the killings committed by Christians on their own free will.

Both my statement and yours are true. There is no difference between these two extremists. They both perverted the religion they claim to follow and used their holy books to justify their evil acts.

The difference is the Quran do not have an overall pacifist maxim to cover itself from the evil and violent acts by Muslims who justify their acts with verses from the Quran.

In addition, the Quran exhorts and condone Muslims to kill non-Muslim within very vague definition of threats [fasadin].

Note the verses quote by John Earnest from the NT specified the specific names and not non-Christians in general.

I showed you before where Islam teaches the exact same thing, but because of your gross misunderstanding of abrogation and how it applies to the Qur'an and what Islam teaches from other religious texts such as the hadiths, you choose to ignore this. When examples like the one I gave above are given you always come back with something like:

This defense for acts of terrorism and atrocities carried out by Christian extremists you keep repeating is complete garbage. This may be what you believe, but it's not preventing Christian extremists from doing the exact same thing Islamic extremists are doing. You want to put all the blame on Islam and make a direct tie between the perpetrators and the religion for Islamic related violence, while at the same time distance Christianity from the perpetrators of Christian related violence. This is not being objective, nor is it using fair judgement. To paraphrase Dr. Bale from the other thread you started "Islamic extremism, including jihadism, is inconceivable without reference to Islam, just as Christian extremism, including Christian terrorism, is inconceivable without reference to Christianity."

Note my argument above why and how the Christian God had covered Christianity from being blamed by acts of Christians acting on their own free will with an overriding pacifist maxim of "love all - even enemies."

Islam on the other hand do not have an overriding pacifist maxim. Whatever verses [less than 10] from the Quran you and others tried to defend Islam as peaceful are easily countered as not supporting the case within the whole context of the Quran and Islam - in Harris' words is a motherload of evil and violent ideas and command to Muslims.
In addition the 10 or so ineffective verses of peace, are overwhelmed by a tsunami of 3400+ contemptuous verses against the Kuffar.

I suggest you wake up, activate your IQ and logic to get tot the truth of the above.

Both Christianity and Islam have been corrupted and/or distorted from their original teachings and intent by individuals, groups, and governments to justify all types of atrocities throughout their histories. In fact, Christianity has had a bloodier history than Islam whether the anti-Islamic propaganda sites you visit tell you that or not. You seriously need to learn the differences between religions and what they teach and religious extremist and what they teach. You are not helping anyone at all by equating the religion of Islam with Islamic extremism and posting anti-Islamic propaganda and links to anti-Islamic propaganda sites online.

To be objective, Christianity is what Jesus Christ preached within the gospels only. The others are appendixes to the specific covenant.
To be a Christian, a person must enter [explicitly or implicitly] into a covenant [divine contract] with the Christian God via Jesus Christ and therefrom comply with the covenanted terms in the gospels.

Do you agree you have an agreement/covenant [implied or explicit] with your Christian God that you have to comply with the covenanted terms to gain salvation to paradise with eternal life?

Note the critical elements of 'covenant [contract] and covenanted terms which are very specific and contain the overriding pacifist maxim of 'love all -even enemies.'

With intellectual honesty, how can you blame Christianity itself if a Christian commit a killing against this maxim.
I agree it would be better if the covenanted terms do not include any 'grey' verses, but the overriding term override all other 'grey' verses, thus Christianity itself cannot be blamed for the acts of Christians acting on their own free will.

Note the critical point is whether one can BLAME a religion for the acts of its believers?
I have proven we can blame Islam itself for the evil acts of SOME Muslims but not the case of Christianity itself when Christian commit evil acts against non-Christians.

Note I am highlighting and presenting the above [esp the STALEMATE DILEMMA] is for the sake of the whole of humanity in the long run and the quest for perpetual peace re spirituality, note the reference from Kant.
Perpetual peace - Wikipedia
You are on the other hand are defending a malignant virus that is festering and a threat within humanity.

Joyousperson · Jun 17, 2019

JosephZ said:
While I agree that anyone is capable of committing an evil act, I disagree with your statement that 20% of all humans are born with an active propensity to commit evil. Despite every individual’s background, social situation, and psychological health being different, I believe all things considered, the potential to commit evil exists across the board to all people (100%). I wouldn't single out a population of 20% as I believe any individual, including myself, is capable of committing a violent act under certain circumstances. In fact, I have committed acts of violence towards others in the past.

I believe this also to be true of radicalization to the point that an individual or a group of people could be responsible for acts of violence on a large scale such as genocides and mass murders. Factors such as inequality, injustice, discrimination, and even foreign policy can lead someone to reach such a point. It all comes down to the environment a person is brought up in and what type of support system they have in their life.

You missed what is critical with my point when you veered off from evil acts to focus violent acts.

As I have to repeat many times, my focus is on on the whole gamut and range of evil acts not just violent acts.
The whole gamut and range of evil acts would cover 1000++ or more types of acts that are adverse to the individual and humanity.
You need to remember this with due consideration for the other party in the discussion.

As we agreed ALL humans has the potential to commit evil acts [note the full range from high, medium to low].

When I stated 'active' tendency, I meant those who are naturally born to be more sensitive and easily be triggered to commit any of the above acts. These are the evil prone.

Note I quoted this research,

The study, published in the journal's June issue, found that 60 percent of people lied at least once during a 10-minute conversation and told an average of two to three lies.
UMass researcher finds most people lie in everyday conversation

Lying is an evil act in various degrees from low to high.
If 60% of people lied at least once during a 10 minute, just imaging how many % would have lied in a year or in their lifetime. It is likely >90% will lie in various degrees. Therefore we can deduce >90% will likely commit a low level evil act.

I have researched the concept of evil extensively and have a hierarchy ["taxonomy" ] of evil acts in terms of evil values from high to low.

I have identified what is medium level evil acts to be acts [not restricted to violence] like mass financials scam e.g. Maddoff who wreck many people financially, serious crimes, killing, murder, rapes. I deduced conservatively relative to the 90%, that 20% of humans has the tendency to commit such medium level crimes.

From this 10% will likely commit serious evil acts and 1% the more and extreme evil acts, such a mass rapes, genocides etc.

I believe my conservative estimates are very reasonable based on common sense and logical inferences.

Btw, those who are not evil prone, i.e. the other 80% are not immune from committing medium level evil acts, but it will take a lot to trigger them into violence, e.g. in the heat of passion, severe provocations and the most likely any acts that is perceived as a threat to their salvation.

In general, any threat to one's salvation will likely trigger a response that is likely culminating in violence or other evil acts.

The mass effort to censor all sorts of critiques against Islam and the killing of innocent non-Muslims. I would regard censorship of free speech is in a way an evil act.

I don't have solid proof.
But like any polls, I believe my 20% is a very logical and reasonable inference.

But she made a clear distinction between the religion of Islam and Islamic extremism.

That is her opinion.
Who is she to judge on this matter re the acts of her rapists who refer to their religion.

We will probably never know one way or the other without hearing the entirety of her lecture, but it still doesn't change the fact that the headline is intentionally misleading. She never says that rape with prisoners of war is acceptable, in fact, she never uses the term rape. Here is what she said "he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives."

Sex like someone has with their wife would be consensual. Islam teaches that sex must be consensual and rape is punishable by death, so she is still not talking about rape in this case.

Again that is her opinion.
Who is she to judge on this matter re the acts of her rapists who refer to their religion.

What counts here is she as a rape victim reported her rapists referred to their religion.

I posted those links showing where those sites are not always reliable because I wanted to go beyond just me saying that. They were supporting evidence to my claim. I don't need a third party to tell me if a certain source is credible or not, because I can make those calls on my own.

Since you don't believe me or the source that I provided, let me show you a couple of examples from here in the Philippines that will prove to you without a shadow of doubt that the Daily Express is not a trustworthy site.

Express UK report:

Horror as ISIS gunmen storm tourist resort in Philippines terror attack – explosions heard
ISIS GUNMEN attacked guests at a popular tourist hotspot in the Philippines, injuring dozens of tourists, according to reports.
By BELINDA ROBINSON
PUBLISHED: 18:52, Thu, Jun 1, 2017
Horror as ISIS gunmen storm tourist resort in Philippines terror attack – explosions heard

Pretty scary story right?

The true story:

No terror attack, no ISIS; only a single gunman with personal financial problems.

Resorts World gunman identified as Jessie Javier Carlos

National Capital Region Police Office chief identified him as Jessie Javier Carlos, 42, a former employee of the Department of Finance stationed at the One Stop Shop. The suspect was identified as a Filipino national contrary to reports that he could be a foreigner because of his looks. Carlos was fired from his job for non-declaration/misdeclaration of his statements, assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

“On this note, we also reiterate our prior statements that this is not an act of terrorism but this incident is confined to the act of one man alone as we have always said,” he said, reiterating that they won’t allow people or any threat group to use this situation to advance their propaganda.-- NCRPO Director Oscar Albayalde
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/90250...ntified-as-jessie-javier-carlos#ixzz5r25gk5Mt

Again the Express UK Headline:

Boxing match blasts leaves 10 dead and injures 20 in Philippines
TEN people have died and at least 20 are injured after two explosions at a boxing match in the Philippines.
By LAURA MOWAT
PUBLISHED: 07:37, Thu, Dec 29, 2016
Boxing match blasts leaves 10 dead and injures 20 in Philippines

Ten dead?

The true story:

No deaths resulted from the bombing.

34 hurt in Leyte town plaza blast

HILONGOS, Leyte: At least 34 persons watching an amateur boxing bout were injured in an explosion at the town plaza here Wednesday night. Initially, 34 were injured. Most of them have been confined at the Hilongos District Hospital and Leyte Baptist Hospital.

At least four victims were referred to the Eastern Visayas Regional Medical Center (EVRMC) in Tacloban City and one to the Living Hope Hospital in Maasin City in Southern Leyte. Most of the victims suffered foot injuries.
34 hurt in Leyte town plaza blast | The Manila Times Online

Remember I also pointed out examples from here in the Philippines that can be found on the religionofpeace website that were untrue.

So I have to ask you, if these sources will mislead their readers even once, or better yet multiple times as I have shown, why should anything they claim be trusted?

I don't deny it is possible for the News media to be wrong. However, these days the News Media are very reserved and cautious when relating any terror attacks to Islamic terrorists.

As for the religionofpeace website I have already qualified we need to provide some margin of errors for cases like those you highlighted.
But the religionofpeace admin are opened to change or deleting any error if corrected.

I agree the list of 34000++ incident of terrorists must be taken with reservations, but even if we discount it by 50% the quantum is still critical.

Thus there is no justifications to deny the actual attacks by Islamist terrorists commit in the name of their religion just because of some errors.

The documentary focused on the race of the perpetrators, however, their religion was mentioned in regard to how right wing groups would react to the story and how they would use these attacks to further their agendas.

I will listen to the video.
If you are right, then I will not refer to it.

No, it only applies to the Jewish and Christian religious texts and the spoken words of the prophets found in them.

Why only the Jewish and Christian religious texts?
To be consistent you need to note the principle and logic involved.

I had argued, a Muslim is one who has entered into a covenant with Allah to comply with the covenanted terms in the Quran as final and thus should not relied on others as authoritative.

In any case, even if a Muslim insist to follow the Gospel maxim to "love all -even enemies" because it is the same with the Quran's verses, there will be other Muslims who oppose it by referring to certain Quranic verse.

So who is right and who is wrong, thus we still end up with STALEMATE DILEMMA where SOME Muslims will continue to kill non-Muslims because they believe they are right according to the verses of the Quran.

There are several verses after that one that were revealed to Muhammad, but interestingly enough, the distinctions between clean and unclean food were one of the last things Moses mentions in the Torah (The Five Books of Moses). This is found in the 14th chapter of the final book. There's still quite a bit after that, but it's still near the end.

The above is flimsy based on confirmation bias, i.e. twisting to suit your beliefs.
You should have agreed with me because it is a mess from false prophet or the group who compiled the Quran.

Yes, the Quran is messed-up by organizing the chapters generally by the size of the chapters and not in chronological order nor in a meaningful thematic format.

Barney2.0 · Jun 17, 2019

Limo said:
I presume that this statics is scientific.
First we're now 1.8 b not 1.6 so, Evil Prone Muslems are 360 millions out of 1.8 billion
I'm also like you worried from :
Evil Prone Christians are 480 millions out of 2.4 billion
Evil Prone Seculars/Nonreligious/Agnostics/Atheists are 240 millions out of 1.2 billion
Evil Prone Hinduisms are 230 millions out of 1.15 billion
Evil Prone Buddhisms are 104.2 millions out of 521 million
Evil Prone Chinese traditional religion are 6.8 millions out of 394 million

So, let us start a WW to vanish all these 20% Evil Prone people from all religions.
Christians are the worst as they caused killing millions in among Christians wars in early and middle era Christianity since 2000 years.
They killed millions in crusader war
They killed 70 million in WWI and WWII
They killed 200000 Japanese with 2 bombs

I think the percentage among Christians is much higher than 20%
How it sounds Sir ?

World War l and ll weren’t Christian Wars, no religious states were actually involved in the war only secular powers were. As for the crusades, well first off they didn’t kill millions, the fact that Islamic historians in history rarely mention the crusades is because to Muslims at the time they were insignificant, they only lasted a few hundred years before becoming uncoordinated and falling apart. Most crusades were defensive except for the fourth crusade which was doesn’t even count as a crusade since it was done without approval from the actual Church and was aimed against other Christians in the Byzantine empire and maybe the crusades against the Baltic Pagans. Besides that the crusades were mainly defensive wars. Islam however since day one has been forcibly spreading its faith and this literally hasn’t stopped, pretty much every Islamic faith has tried to spread Islam on non Muslims or other Muslims who varied with the states islam by forceful means. Islam is also the religion that gives Muslim heretics two options, returning to Islam or death, compared to Christianity that actually let’s heretics have there say, compare how Orthodox Christianity dealt with the Arians to how Orthodox Muslims dealt with he Mu’tazilites.

JosephZ · Jun 17, 2019

Joyousperson said:
Did Peter McLoughlin admit he is right wing or is that a label thrown at him by his opponents?
Note I stated one must have intellectual integrity in being objective and support one's views with evidence.

I gave you a source that will show that he is a right wing extremists. You will have to do a google search to find it. I don't want to put a link to his social media account here because what he says about Muslims, immigrants, and homosexuals is that vile. From what he posts, I doubt even he would deny that he's a right wing extremist.

Joyousperson said:
Note his views;
I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me.
The above is wrong.

The shooter was a Calvinist. Calvinist believe that God predestined individuals for salvation, and that individuals cannot choose God. This is a very popular doctrine within the evangelical community in the US especially among the Baptist, Evangelical Lutheran, Episcopal, United Methodist, Presbyterian, and United Church of Christ denominations. If you use the search feature on this forum using the word Calvinism or Calvinist you will find there are many members here that are Calvinist and believe that salvation is predestined.

Joyousperson said:
The difference is the Quran do not have an overall pacifist maxim to cover itself from the evil and violent acts by Muslims who justify their acts with verses from the Quran.

It does, you just believe it has been abrogated.

Joyousperson said:
In addition, the Quran exhorts and condone Muslims to kill non-Muslim within very vague definition of threats [fasadin].

The Muslims that were being spoken to in the Qur'an lived in a different culture, at a different point in time, and were facing unique situations. Until you stop looking at the Qur'an from a modern perspective and start looking at it through a historical lens, you will continue to misinterpret what it is saying.

Joyousperson said:
Islam on the other hand do not have an overriding pacifist maxim. Whatever verses [less than 10] from the Quran you and others tried to defend Islam as peaceful are easily countered as not

It's far more than 10 and well over 100. I think you even provided a link that showed this in one of the threads. How many verses do you think the Bible has abut loving others and being passive? I would guess that the numbers between the two would be pretty close to being the same percentage wise.

Joyousperson said:
To be objective, Christianity is what Jesus Christ preached within the gospels only. The others are appendixes to the specific covenant.

This is incorrect.

Jesus lived under the system of the Old Covenant of the Law given by Moses. He was a Jew and lived His life according to the Law. He also instructed His disciples and the Jews to follow the law.

Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe... (Matthew 23:1-3)

Jesus' ministry was only to Israel.

“I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24)

Jesus instructed His original disciples to take His message to Israel only.

These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 10:5-6)

The book of Acts confirms that the original apostles only went to Israel.

And on that day a great persecution began against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. (Acts 8:1)

So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that occurred in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone. (Acts 11:19)

Jesus came to Israel to confirm the promises given to the fathers.

For I say that Christ has become a servant to the circumcision on behalf of the truth of God to confirm the promises given to the fathers, (Romans 15:8)

During Jesus' earthly ministry, no one was preaching the message that Jesus died for our sins and that faith is all that is required for salvation. Jesus had not even died yet, and even many years after His Resurrection, the original disciples had no concept of this.

It was only after Jesus ascended into Heaven that Paul came as a minister of Jesus Christ to the gentiles and to provide testimony to His life and His work at the cross. The message that Paul received was delivered to him by the resurrected Christ.

“I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” (Galatians 1:11, 12)

Paul was the minister to the Gentiles.

Because of the grace that was given me from God, to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, (Romans 15:15-16)

What Paul taught was not shared by Jesus to the Jews during His earthly ministry. It had remained a mystery until it was revealed to Paul several years after the ascension of Jesus.

Of this church I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (Colossians 1:25-27)

“Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, who has made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith; to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be glory forever.” (Romans 16:25-27)

Below is the gospel:

“Now brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.” (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)

This message of the gospel of grace through faith alone had to remain a secret in order for the prophesies to be fulfilled.

but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; (1 Corinthians 2:7-8)

Had this mystery not been concealed the work at the cross wouldn't have taken place. This is why even the disciples that were the closest to Jesus during His earthy ministry did not understand the gospel of grace It was never preached to Israel until after the work on the cross and only after it was revealed to Paul.

So as can be seen, Christianity is not limited to what Jesus Christ preached within the gospels only, nor are the other books found in the New Testament just appendixes.

Joyousperson said:
To be a Christian, a person must enter [explicitly or implicitly] into a covenant [divine contract] with the Christian God via Jesus Christ and therefrom comply with the covenanted terms in the gospels. Do you agree you have an agreement/covenant [implied or explicit] with your Christian God that you have to comply with the covenanted terms to gain salvation to paradise with eternal life?

I believe that I am justified by my faith in Jesus Christ rather than trying to adhere to terms of a covenant that would require works on my part to earn salvation. The only term I feel that I need to comply with in regard to salvation is to put my faith in Jesus Christ and in Him alone.

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed... Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ...

I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. (Romans 5:1)(Romans 3:23)(Galatians 2:20)

Joyousperson said:
With intellectual honesty, how can you blame Christianity itself if a Christian commit a killing against this maxim.

I don't blame Christianity as my previous posts make clear.

JosephZ said:
Islam and Christianity aren't the problem, it's the individuals and extremist groups that pervert these religions that are the problem.

JosephZ said:
The poison isn't found in the religion its self, the poison is found in the individuals who twist the scriptures and teachings of these religions to push their personal agendas and to achieve their goals.

JosephZ said:
Shouldn't we instead be putting our focus on the individuals and groups that are perverting these religions to justify violence instead of the religions themselves and their holy books?

JosephZ · Jun 17, 2019

Al Masihi said:
Islam however since day one has been forcibly spreading its faith and this literally hasn’t stopped, pretty much every Islamic faith has tried to spread Islam on non Muslims or other Muslims who varied with the states islam by forceful means.

It seems you omitted quite a bit of history and current events in your post. What is your opinion on these examples below that I gave in another thread?

The NLFT manifesto says that they want to expand the kingdom of God and Christ in Tripura. They have been accused of funding terrorism and forcing local tribals to convert to Christianity at gunpoint.

The government in India's north-eastern state of Tripura says it has evidence that the state's Baptist Church is involved in backing separatist rebels.

At least 20 Hindus in Tripura have been killed by the NLFT in two years for resisting forced conversion to Christianity. A leader of the Jamatia tribe, Rampada Jamatia, said that armed NLFT militants were forcibly converting tribal villagers to Christianity, which he said was a serious threat to Hinduism. It is believed that as many as 5,000 tribal villagers were forcibly converted from 1999 to 2001. These forcible conversions to Christianity, sometimes including the use of "rape as a means of intimidation,"

The NSCN

Equally disturbing is the NSCN faction’s dubious claim of being the torch bearers of Christ’s gospel. Isak Chishi Swu the NSCN-IM chairman has on records said that Nagalim will send out 10,000 missionaries around the world when it achieves independence. “Our intention is that Nagalim is for Christ. We have proclaimed it. Nagalim is for Christ. God has got his plan for Nagalim,” he said. “We were evangelized by the American Baptist missionaries back in 1839, and we don’t have the adequate words to thank the American missionaries.”

There have been reports from North east region that the Naga insurgents have used threats and intimidation in areas where they operate all the name of Lord Jesus Christ...

The LRA, Which according the United Nations, was responsible for more than 100,000 deaths, the abduction of between 60,000 to 100,000 children, and the displacement of as many as 2.5 million civilians between 1987 and 2012. The LRA claimed it was fighting for the establishment of the rule of the Ten Commandments in a theocratic Uganda. Their activities covered a large swath of Africa committing atrocities in not only Uganda, but also South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Central African Republic.

"The LRA is fighting in the name of God. God is the one helping us in the bush. That’s why we created this name, Lord’s Resistance Army. And people always ask us, are we fighting for the Biblical Ten Commandments of God. That is true because the Ten Commandments of God is the constitution that God has given to the people of the world. All people. If you go to the constitution, nobody will accept people who steal, nobody could accept to go and take somebody’s wife, nobody could accept to innocently kill, or whatever. The Ten Commandments carries all this.” -- Vincent Otti, LRA Commander

Anti-Balaka Militias in the Central African republic

After the Muslims were baptised into the Apostolic Church in a ceremony attended by the village headman, they “had to show the anti-balaka [their] baptismal cards to not be killed,”

“We had no choice but to join the Catholic Church,” the oldest brother told Amnesty International. “The anti-balaka swore they’d kill us if we didn’t.” Another brother said that the family members have to attend church services every Sunday. “We have to confirm that we’re really Catholic,” he explained.

“The anti-balaka told us to go to church,” recalled Abdoulaye A. “‘If you don’t want to, we’ll kill you,’ they told us.”

“If you refuse to be baptised you have to pay a fine,” said Hassan I., age 61, who lived in Balego until recently

“It is effectively illegal for us to pray,” said Abdou Y., in Mbaiki. “We have to hide, do it quickly, and do it by ourselves. Collective Friday prayers are impossible.”

Besides massacres, sectarian killings, and wholesale ethnic cleansing, one of the clearest signs of the intensity of sectarian animus was the destruction of the country’s mosques. In town after town, village after village, mosques were looted, vandalized, damaged or destroyed in early 2014, at the same time that the Muslim population was driven out. Some have estimated that more than 400 mosques were destroyed.

The NPA/Communist ideology is a form of Christian Communism like what is found in Latin America. This is why you see many of it's members who also belong to the Church.

''They begin to see God as a historical process, Christ as a liberator and faith becomes commitment to the Communist Party. ''It used to be the church said killing could only be justified in self-defense,'' the priest said. ''But in our case, there is what we call structural injustice, we believe you don't have to wait for the other person to kill you first before you kill them.''

Many in leadership positions of these Communist Christian terrorist groups are Priests, pastors, and other church leaders.

There have been two serious attacks in just the past several months in the US where the Bible has been quoted by terrorists to justify their actions.

“Jews are the children of Satan. (John 8:44) — —- the Lord Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.” -- Robert Bowers, before killing 11 people at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA

I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me. And the Spirit keeps me... My God does not take kindly to the destruction of His creation. Especially one of the most beautiful, intelligent, and innovative races that He has created. Least of all at the hands of one of the most ugly, sinful, deceitful, cursed, and corrupt. My God understands why I did what I did.

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9).

“Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee” (Revelation 3:9). -- From the Manifesto of John Earnest, gunman who entered a synagogue in California killing 1 person and injuring 3 others.

Under "The Doctrine of Discovery" and "Manifest Destiny." The Bible was used to justify the conquering of non-Christian lands and Christianizing the native populations.

This is one of the primary verses used in support of Christian Imperialism:

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.(Genesis 1:28)

Notice its similarity to the statement below:

“free and ample faculty…to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens [Muslims] and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit." (Romanus Pontifex, 1455)

This was also sited in the US Supreme Court:

We maintain that the principle declared in the fifteenth century as the law of Christendom, that discovery gave title to assume sovereignty [a right of domination] over and to govern the unconverted [infidel] natives of Africa, Asia, and North and South America, has been recognized as a part of the national law [law of nations], for nearly four centuries, and it is now so recognized by every Christian power in its political department and its judicial….Our claim is based on the right to coerce obedience. (State v. Foreman, Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1835)

These doctrines lead to the deaths of countless millions and the suffering of countless more in North and South America, the Caribbean, Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific Islands.

When the conquistadors made initial contact with natives they would read a proclamation called the “Requerimiento” in Spanish (A language the natives could not understand and without translators). This proclamation informed them that they must accept Christian rule and the authority of the Pope, as well the Spanish monarchy which the Pope had granted their land to without any input from the natives, and that the natives must also accept missionaries sent to preach to them or they would be considered hostile and would be killed and/or enslaved.

Below is some of the content from the Requerimiento:

The Lord our God, Living and Eternal, created the Heaven and the Earth, and one man and one woman, of whom you and we, all the men of the world, were and are descendants, and all those who come after us. But, on account of the multitude which has sprung from this man and woman in the five thousand years since the world was created, it was necessary that some men should go one way and some another, and that they should be divided into many kingdoms and provinces, for in one alone they could not be sustained.

Of all these nations God our Lord gave charge to one man, called St. Peter, that he should be Lord and Superior of all the men in the world, that all should obey him, and that he should be the head of the whole human race, wherever men should live, and under whatever law, sect, or belief they should be; and he gave him the world for his kingdom and jurisdiction.

And he commanded him to place his seat in Rome, as the spot most fitting to rule the world from; but also he permitted him to have his seat in any other part of the world, and to judge and govern all Christians, Moors, Jews, Gentiles, and all other sects. This man was called Pope, as if to say, Admirable Great Father and Governor of men. The men who lived in that time obeyed that St. Peter, and took him for Lord, King, and Superior of the universe; so also they have regarded the others who after him have been elected to the pontificate, and so has it been continued even till now, and will continue till the end of the world...

...We ask and require you that you consider what we have said to you, and that you take the time that shall be necessary to understand and deliberate upon it, and that you acknowledge the Church as the Ruler and Superior of the whole world, and the high priest called Pope, and in his name the King and Queen Dona Juana our lords, in his place, as superiors and lords and kings of these islands and this Tierra-firme by virtue of the said donation, and that you consent and give place that these religious fathers should declare and preach to you the aforesaid.

...if you do not do this, and maliciously make delay in it, I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country, and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of their Highnesses; we shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the mischief and damage that we can, as to vassals who do not obey, and refuse to receive their lord, and resist and contradict him; and we protest that the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault, and not that of their Highnesses, or ours, nor of these cavaliers who come with us.

The United States followed it's policy of "Manifest Destiny" in the 19th century and continuing into the 20th century where Christianity was spread outside the US borders and into the islands of the Pacific.

Here's a quote from President William McKinley concerning the Philippines:

"I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way—I don’t know how it was, but it came...

...that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died..." --

In the United States' attempt to "Civilize and Christianize" Filipinos, tens of thousands were slaughtered including women and children, rape and pillaging was widespread, and hundreds of thousands (Some estimates put the death toll between one and three million) died from disease and famine.

Barney2.0 · Jun 17, 2019

JosephZ said:
It seems you omitted quite a bit of history and current events in your post. What is your opinion on these examples below that I gave in another thread?

The NLFT manifesto says that they want to expand the kingdom of God and Christ in Tripura. They have been accused of funding terrorism and forcing local tribals to convert to Christianity at gunpoint.

The government in India's north-eastern state of Tripura says it has evidence that the state's Baptist Church is involved in backing separatist rebels.

At least 20 Hindus in Tripura have been killed by the NLFT in two years for resisting forced conversion to Christianity. A leader of the Jamatia tribe, Rampada Jamatia, said that armed NLFT militants were forcibly converting tribal villagers to Christianity, which he said was a serious threat to Hinduism. It is believed that as many as 5,000 tribal villagers were forcibly converted from 1999 to 2001. These forcible conversions to Christianity, sometimes including the use of "rape as a means of intimidation,"

The NSCN

Equally disturbing is the NSCN faction’s dubious claim of being the torch bearers of Christ’s gospel. Isak Chishi Swu the NSCN-IM chairman has on records said that Nagalim will send out 10,000 missionaries around the world when it achieves independence. “Our intention is that Nagalim is for Christ. We have proclaimed it. Nagalim is for Christ. God has got his plan for Nagalim,” he said. “We were evangelized by the American Baptist missionaries back in 1839, and we don’t have the adequate words to thank the American missionaries.”

There have been reports from North east region that the Naga insurgents have used threats and intimidation in areas where they operate all the name of Lord Jesus Christ...

The LRA, Which according the United Nations, was responsible for more than 100,000 deaths, the abduction of between 60,000 to 100,000 children, and the displacement of as many as 2.5 million civilians between 1987 and 2012. The LRA claimed it was fighting for the establishment of the rule of the Ten Commandments in a theocratic Uganda. Their activities covered a large swath of Africa committing atrocities in not only Uganda, but also South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Central African Republic.

"The LRA is fighting in the name of God. God is the one helping us in the bush. That’s why we created this name, Lord’s Resistance Army. And people always ask us, are we fighting for the Biblical Ten Commandments of God. That is true because the Ten Commandments of God is the constitution that God has given to the people of the world. All people. If you go to the constitution, nobody will accept people who steal, nobody could accept to go and take somebody’s wife, nobody could accept to innocently kill, or whatever. The Ten Commandments carries all this.” -- Vincent Otti, LRA Commander

Anti-Balaka Militias in the Central African republic

After the Muslims were baptised into the Apostolic Church in a ceremony attended by the village headman, they “had to show the anti-balaka [their] baptismal cards to not be killed,”

“We had no choice but to join the Catholic Church,” the oldest brother told Amnesty International. “The anti-balaka swore they’d kill us if we didn’t.” Another brother said that the family members have to attend church services every Sunday. “We have to confirm that we’re really Catholic,” he explained.

“The anti-balaka told us to go to church,” recalled Abdoulaye A. “‘If you don’t want to, we’ll kill you,’ they told us.”

“If you refuse to be baptised you have to pay a fine,” said Hassan I., age 61, who lived in Balego until recently

“It is effectively illegal for us to pray,” said Abdou Y., in Mbaiki. “We have to hide, do it quickly, and do it by ourselves. Collective Friday prayers are impossible.”

Besides massacres, sectarian killings, and wholesale ethnic cleansing, one of the clearest signs of the intensity of sectarian animus was the destruction of the country’s mosques. In town after town, village after village, mosques were looted, vandalized, damaged or destroyed in early 2014, at the same time that the Muslim population was driven out. Some have estimated that more than 400 mosques were destroyed.

The NPA/Communist ideology is a form of Christian Communism like what is found in Latin America. This is why you see many of it's members who also belong to the Church.

''They begin to see God as a historical process, Christ as a liberator and faith becomes commitment to the Communist Party. ''It used to be the church said killing could only be justified in self-defense,'' the priest said. ''But in our case, there is what we call structural injustice, we believe you don't have to wait for the other person to kill you first before you kill them.''

Many in leadership positions of these Communist Christian terrorist groups are Priests, pastors, and other church leaders.

There have been two serious attacks in just the past several months in the US where the Bible has been quoted by terrorists to justify their actions.

“Jews are the children of Satan. (John 8:44) — —- the Lord Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.” -- Robert Bowers, before killing 11 people at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA

I did not choose to be a Christian. The Father chose me. The Son saved me. And the Spirit keeps me... My God does not take kindly to the destruction of His creation. Especially one of the most beautiful, intelligent, and innovative races that He has created. Least of all at the hands of one of the most ugly, sinful, deceitful, cursed, and corrupt. My God understands why I did what I did.

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9).

“Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee” (Revelation 3:9). -- From the Manifesto of John Earnest, gunman who entered a synagogue in California killing 1 person and injuring 3 others.

Under "The Doctrine of Discovery" and "Manifest Destiny." The Bible was used to justify the conquering of non-Christian lands and Christianizing the native populations.

This is one of the primary verses used in support of Christian Imperialism:

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.(Genesis 1:28)

Notice its similarity to the statement below:

“free and ample faculty…to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens [Muslims] and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit." (Romanus Pontifex, 1455)

This was also sited in the US Supreme Court:

We maintain that the principle declared in the fifteenth century as the law of Christendom, that discovery gave title to assume sovereignty [a right of domination] over and to govern the unconverted [infidel] natives of Africa, Asia, and North and South America, has been recognized as a part of the national law [law of nations], for nearly four centuries, and it is now so recognized by every Christian power in its political department and its judicial….Our claim is based on the right to coerce obedience. (State v. Foreman, Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1835)

These doctrines lead to the deaths of countless millions and the suffering of countless more in North and South America, the Caribbean, Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific Islands.

When the conquistadors made initial contact with natives they would read a proclamation called the “Requerimiento” in Spanish (A language the natives could not understand and without translators). This proclamation informed them that they must accept Christian rule and the authority of the Pope, as well the Spanish monarchy which the Pope had granted their land to without any input from the natives, and that the natives must also accept missionaries sent to preach to them or they would be considered hostile and would be killed and/or enslaved.

Below is some of the content from the Requerimiento:

The Lord our God, Living and Eternal, created the Heaven and the Earth, and one man and one woman, of whom you and we, all the men of the world, were and are descendants, and all those who come after us. But, on account of the multitude which has sprung from this man and woman in the five thousand years since the world was created, it was necessary that some men should go one way and some another, and that they should be divided into many kingdoms and provinces, for in one alone they could not be sustained.

Of all these nations God our Lord gave charge to one man, called St. Peter, that he should be Lord and Superior of all the men in the world, that all should obey him, and that he should be the head of the whole human race, wherever men should live, and under whatever law, sect, or belief they should be; and he gave him the world for his kingdom and jurisdiction.

And he commanded him to place his seat in Rome, as the spot most fitting to rule the world from; but also he permitted him to have his seat in any other part of the world, and to judge and govern all Christians, Moors, Jews, Gentiles, and all other sects. This man was called Pope, as if to say, Admirable Great Father and Governor of men. The men who lived in that time obeyed that St. Peter, and took him for Lord, King, and Superior of the universe; so also they have regarded the others who after him have been elected to the pontificate, and so has it been continued even till now, and will continue till the end of the world...

...We ask and require you that you consider what we have said to you, and that you take the time that shall be necessary to understand and deliberate upon it, and that you acknowledge the Church as the Ruler and Superior of the whole world, and the high priest called Pope, and in his name the King and Queen Dona Juana our lords, in his place, as superiors and lords and kings of these islands and this Tierra-firme by virtue of the said donation, and that you consent and give place that these religious fathers should declare and preach to you the aforesaid.

...if you do not do this, and maliciously make delay in it, I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country, and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of their Highnesses; we shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the mischief and damage that we can, as to vassals who do not obey, and refuse to receive their lord, and resist and contradict him; and we protest that the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault, and not that of their Highnesses, or ours, nor of these cavaliers who come with us.

The United States followed it's policy of "Manifest Destiny" in the 19th century and continuing into the 20th century where Christianity was spread outside the US borders and into the islands of the Pacific.

Here's a quote from President William McKinley concerning the Philippines:

"I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way—I don’t know how it was, but it came...

...that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died..." --

In the United States' attempt to "Civilize and Christianize" Filipinos, tens of thousands were slaughtered including women and children, rape and pillaging was widespread, and hundreds of thousands (Some estimates put the death toll between one and three million) died from disease and famine.

The Lord’s Resistance Army never exceeded the numbers of 3,000 so I doubt the statistics of the death toll and not to mention that they massacred countless Christians on Christmas Day in the year of 2007, I guess they must really be following the Ten Commandments to be able to claim to apply them when they pretty much completely broke the Thou Shall not kill Command. The Anti Balaka militias are a response to Boko Haram and similar Islamic groups which have been murdering Christians and members of native beliefs since God knows when. I can’t justify what they’re doing, but violent actions to religious groups is going to trigger violent responses and Islam has been the author of that since day one.

Communism and Socialism aren’t compatible with Christianity no matter how many priests or pastors there are that follow communist parties. First off the Catholic Church has condemned communism and has stated that one can’t remain in the Church and hold to communism, this has been the stance of the Catholic Church since World War ll. As for the United States, it isn’t a Christian country, it has always been secular, since state and Church have always been separated so it doesn’t mater what the United States did or claimed they did it for, the United States is hardly on terms to claim to speak for all of Christendom. The Catholic also Church refuted and repudiated the religious basis the Spanish used to enslave natives in 1513 and condemned them for doing so, when was the last time Muslims condemned the four “righteous and rightly guided Caliphs for pillaging, murdering, and subjecting entire nations to Islam, keep in mind these are the same guys promised heaven in Islam and the companions of Mohammed. You can read more about the condemnation of Spanish colonialism and subjugation of Natives by the Catholic Church here:

http://www.cccb.ca/site/images/stories/pdf/catholic response to doctrine of discovery and tn.pdf

Muslims were colonizing nations before Christians were, the Arab slave trade for example resulted in the enslavement and death of more then one million Africans and was the cause of the European and transatlantic slave trade. I don’t see you criticizing that, the fact that you always rush in to defend Islam and the fact your actually attacking the Bible as promoting terrorism while the Quran doesn’t makes me question if your sincere at all.

Genesis 1:28 is talking about Adam Eve and the human race in general to inhabit the land God gave them, there weren’t other people living there before them so this isn’t talking about invading someone else’s land and it says refers specifically to the first humans and not anyone else to come after, so how does this in any way condone or justify imperialism of any kind, more over can you show me an official colonial document that quotes this passage and explains how it justifies the taking of other people’s land, and we’ll see if their interpretation of the passage (if they even did quote it at all in justification of colonialism) makes any sense. Unbelieving Jews might be in anathema for rejecting Christ as we see in Revelation 2:9 and Revelation 3:9, but do you see the obligation to forcibly subdue them for rejecting Christ anywhere in the New Testament? John 8:44 is talking about a specific group of Jews who mocked Christ and styled themselves as Sons of God, not all Jews, Jesus was not calling every Jew in the world the Son of Satan, how could he when he was Jewish and his disciples were Jews and Israelites.

As usual you’ve brought up the same arguments despite having been explained to that the two kinds of religious violence done within Islam and Christianity don’t equal each other. As usual you’ve been refuted and are still trying to justify Islam. And I can keep going on and on.

dzheremi · Jun 17, 2019

It's never going to matter. Muslims won't understand the difference between secular countries and non-secular ones because they're only ever had secularism forced on them, never grown it natively except in failed experiments in ethnic nationalism which at best restrained the religious powers long enough for the countries as a whole to free themselves from colonialism (e.g., Egypt in the 1920s-30s with the Wafd Party of Saad Zaghloul and Mustafa El Nahhas, which dissolved after the Revolution in 1952), before things unfortunately went back to usual, with Muslims on top and everyone else on the bottom. They think this is the natural order in all societies (or else why would these terrorist groups talk about "conquering Rome" as though it is still the 1500s, when religiously-based government and societal motives was the natural order in Western societies as well?), so to them being a Christian-majority country means they're "Christian Wars" (in WWI and WWII), even though the Christian-majority nations in the West stopped having religious wars by the 1710s -- two full centuries before WWI. Nevermind the fact that outside of Europe (where the Christian faith is mostly dead except among the elderly and immigrants), Christian-majority countries that still are fairly devout today like Mexico nevertheless had wars later than that over religion, but they were over the secularization of society, as in the Cristero War (1926-1929), which ultimately allowed the Catholic Church to be reestablished in Mexico, but with limits on land rights, since that was what a lot of the anti-clerical sentiment was based on to begin with (the belief that the RCC had too much land, money, and power, and too many priests in the country; some of the laws drafted at this time remained in Mexican law code until 1992, but that was when the government became even more secular by granting all religious groups recognition and those same limited land rights).

When was the last time a Muslim-majority nation went to war to advance secularism or beat back religious fundamentalists in their society? I guess the Lebanese army did that recently by fighting the terrorists who had infested Tripoli (and God bless them for that, that He may lead them to ultimate victory over the Takfiri pigs who are doing the work of Satan), but otherwise you only see it in popular uprisings, like in Egypt when at least 14 million Egyptians rose up to protest MB rule by Herr Morsi and Co.

Such things don't happen in compliance with Islam, because of course you're supposed to want government by the Shari'a if you are a serious Muslim. And yet we have Muslims here lecturing us on how terrible Christians are because look at this event, and that event, and this one, and every example they come up with shows that they don't know what they're talking about, because their religion renders them unable to make these distinctions that are at the foundation of how modern Christian-majority, secular societies function.

JosephZ · Jun 17, 2019

Al Masihi said:
The Lord’s Resistance Army never exceeded the numbers of 3,000 so I doubt the statistics of the death toll and not to mention that they massacred countless Christians on Christmas Day in the year of 2007, I guess they must really be following the Ten Commandments to be able to claim to apply them when they pretty much broke the Thiu Shall not kill Command.

While the number quoted may be on the high end, the LRA has killed at least as many people as ISIS and the LRA has kidnapped far more people, especially children. The killing of Christians should come as no surprise, they are an extremist group after all and are only perverting the religion they claim to be followers of much the same as ISIS perverting Islam to justify their atrocities.

What about the fact that almost all of those killed by Islamic terrorist groups, being Muslim? Better than 90% of the tens of thousands who have been killed by Islamic extremists in the past two decades have been other Muslims.

I can't see a difference between Islamic and Christian terrorist groups. They both pervert the religions they claim to represent and they are both evil.

Al Masihi said:
The Anti Balaka militias are a response to Boko Haram And Similar groups which have been murdering Christians and members of native beliefs since God knows when. I can’t justify what they’re doing, but violent actions to religious groups is going to trigger violent responses and Islam has been the author of that since day one.

This goes both ways. Many of the Muslim terror groups were formed in a response to Christian violence against Muslims. I see no difference between the two groups.

Al Masihi said:
Muslims were colonizing nations before Christians were, the Arab slave trade which resulted in the enslavement and death in more then one million Africans and was the cause of the European and transatlantic slave trade.

Colonization is a fairly modern term, but what about the Byzantine Empire? They were conquering lands prior to Islam. What the Islamic imperialists did was no different than what any other empires were doing during the same periods in history. You can't blame slavery on Islam either.

Al Masihi said:
I don’t see you criticizing that, the fact that you always rush in to defend Islam and the fact your actually attacking the Bible as promoting terrorism while the Quran doesn’t makes me question if your sincere at all.

I have never attacked the Bible as promoting terrorism, what would ever give you that idea? These previous comments I have made should be proof enough of that.

JosephZ said:
My point in showing you examples of so called Christians and "Christian" terrorists groups committing atrocities is to show you that extremists can hijack any religion and use its holy scriptures to justify their actions. I'm not suggesting we ignore any type of extremism and we need to address all forms of extremism regardless of the ideology behind it.

JosephZ said:
Islam and Christianity aren't the problem, it's the individuals and extremist groups that pervert these religions that are the problem.

JosephZ said:
I have provided you with examples of how individuals and governments have perverted the teachings found in Christianity and the Bible to commit atrocities, enslave people, and conquer lands. The poison isn't found in the religion its self, the poison is found in the individuals who twist the scriptures and teachings of these religions to push their personal agendas and to achieve their goals.

JosephZ said:
If less than 1% of Christians and Muslims are justifying their violence and atrocities by using verses from their holy books, are the religious texts the problem or the extremists? Shouldn't we instead be putting our focus on the individuals and groups that are perverting these religions to justify violence instead of the religions themselves and their holy books?

As for my sincerity and the reason I am so passionate about this subject:

JosephZ said:
I'm in no way defending or trying to justify Islam. As a Christian I believe it's a false religion and Muhammad was a false prophet; however; I will defend Muslims and dispel the misinformation and falsehoods being spread by extremists and anti-Islamic propagandists. I'm just trying to educate my brothers and sisters in Christ about Islam and what Muslims believe, so they will not fear this religion and those who follow it. How can Christians share their faith with Muslims if they don't interact with them and have already prejudged them based on all of the misinformation being pushed by Islamic extremists and anti-Islamic propagandists? Ignorance of Islam by non-Muslims is at the root of many of the problems we are seeing in the world today and if more people would take the time to study the religion and reach out to Muslims, the world we live in would be a better place for everyone.

JosephZ said:
I am a Christian, an ambassador of Christ, the Truth. I take honesty and integrity seriously. It's one of the reasons I don't hide behind an anonymous screen name and provide information about myself in my profile. I would never intentionally deceive others on a public forum or anywhere else for that matter. My purpose for sharing what I know about Islam and Muslims is primarily so my brothers and sisters in Christ will not fear this religion and those who follow it. I'm just trying to counter the false narrative the anti-Islamic propagandists are spreading. Their motivations are self serving, divisive, and fuel hatred for others. My motivations are the opposite and are motivated by love for my brothers and sisters in Christ and for all of those who do not know Him yet.

JosephZ said:
Unlike anti-Islamic propagandists like Robert Spencer whose intent it is to create division between Muslims and non-Muslims, I encourage my brothers and sisters in Christ to learn more about Islam and what Muslims believe so they will not fear this religion and those who follow it. I want all Muslims to come to know Christ and this becomes increasingly more difficult when Christians avoid interacting with them out of fear and ignorance. Anti-Islamic propagandists further exploit this fear and ignorance for their own personal gain. They really don't care about you, me, or anyone else, much less the truth.

Al Masihi said:
As usual you’ve brought up the same arguments despite having been explained to that the two kinds of religious violence done within Islam and Christianity don’t equal each other. As usual you’ve been refuted and are still trying to justify Islam. And I can keep going on and on.

First off, in what way am I trying to justify Islam? The subject is violent extremism and my focus has always been the extremists elements found in the religion and trying to teach people how to differentiate between the teachings of the religion of Islam and the teachings of extremists. In doing this, it requires a lot of discussion about Islam and quoting Islamic texts, but it doesn't mean I'm trying to justify the religion its self.

As for being refuted, refuted by who? Two or three anonymous people on an internet forum who have an obvious anti-Islamic bias who use notorious anti-Islamic propagandist and propaganda sites to support their positions? The counter arguments from these individuals are the same tiring arguments that have been used since 9/11 in an attempt to make Islam look like a violent religion and to shine a bad light on those who follow it. They are also using the same handful of verses taken from the Qur'an and sentences from hadiths over and over out of their textual and historical context to try and show this. Just look at any anti-Islamic propaganda site you can find online. Those who you say are refuting me are using the same exact verses and the same content that can be found on those sites. Talk about using the same arguments and going on and on...

Meanwhile, the fact that less than 1/10th of 1% of those proclaiming to be Muslims are participating in any sort of violent jihad proves that their claims are false. If Islam did teach what they believe, for sure more Muslims than that would be participating.

I have asked you this several times before, but you have always failed to answer, how long have you lived in Saudi Arabia? I see that you are only 18, have you spent your whole life there?

Barney2.0 · Jun 17, 2019

JosephZ said:
While the number quoted may be on the high end, the LRA has killed at least as many people as ISIS and the LRA has kidnapped far more people, especially children. The killing of Christians should come as no surprise, they are an extremist group after all and are only perverting the religion they claim to be followers of much the same as ISIS perverting Islam to justify their atrocities.

What about the fact that almost all of those killed by Islamic terrorist groups, being Muslim? Better than 90% of the tens of thousands who have been killed by Islamic extremists in the past two decades have been other Muslims.

I can't see a difference between Islamic and Christian terrorist groups. They both pervert the religions they claim to represent and they are both evil.

This goes both ways. Many of the Muslim terror groups were formed in a response to Christian violence against Muslims. I see no difference between the two groups.

Colonization is a fairly modern term, but what about the Byzantine Empire? They were conquering lands prior to Islam. What the Islamic imperialists did was no different than what any other empires were doing during the same periods in history. You can't blame slavery on Islam either.

I have never attacked the Bible as promoting terrorism, what would ever give you that idea? These previous comments I have made should be proof enough of that.

As for my sincerity and the reason I am so passionate about this subject:

First off, in what way am I trying to justify Islam? The subject is violent extremism and my focus has always been the extremists elements found in the religion and trying to teach people how to differentiate between the teachings of the religion of Islam and the teachings of extremists. In doing this, it requires a lot of discussion about Islam and quoting Islamic texts, but it doesn't mean I'm trying to justify the religion its self.

As for being refuted, refuted by who? Two or three anonymous people on an internet forum who have an obvious anti-Islamic bias who use notorious anti-Islamic propagandist and propaganda sites to support their positions? The counter arguments from these individuals are the same tiring arguments that have been used since 9/11 in an attempt to make Islam look like a violent religion and to shine a bad light on those who follow it. They are also using the same handful of verses taken from the Qur'an and sentences from hadiths over and over out of their textual and historical context to try and show this. Just look at any anti-Islamic propaganda site you can find online. Those who you say are refuting me are using the same exact verses and the same content that can be found on those sites. Talk about using the same arguments and going on and on...

Meanwhile, the fact that less than 1/10th of 1% of those proclaiming to be Muslims are participating in any sort of violent jihad proves that their claims are false. If Islam did teach what they believe, for sure more Muslims than that would be participating.

I have asked you this several times before, but you have always failed to answer, how long have you lived in Saudi Arabia? I see that you are only 18, have you spent your whole life there?

What does Isis do that’s different to what the original Caliphate did, that’s million dollar question that I’ve been asking Muslims for years now none have really given me an answer, show me one way Isis contradicts what the companions of Mohammed were already doing after his death. Due to secularism and the current circumstances of how the world works I’m sure most Muslims don’t wish to spread their faith forcefully since we don’t live in the Middle Ages anymore and it’s simply not good door buisness in the case of Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia which rely on non Muslim nations to stabilize its economy. Most Muslims not practicing Islam due to the current circumstances of the world doesn’t mean Islam doesn’t teach offensive Jihad. Compare that to the Apostles of Christ, even the “villainous” St Paul himself died at the executioners block due to preaching the Gospel through his voice not his sword. Peter died crucified upside down for preaching the Gospel, James was also killed for the Gospel, Saint Andrew was crucified for the Gospel and the list goes on and on. Abu Bakr died of sickness as he was planning a conquest of the Byzantine and Persian empires, Umar got killed by a Persian Zoroastrian slave whom was abused by his master and enslaved after the conquest of Persia by Umar at sword point. Uthman was killed by other Muslims because they felt he was corrupt and oppressive and they wanted to take over the Caliphate, and Ali was killed by the Khawariji Muslim sect because they felt he was not fit to rule due the instability going on in the Caliphate. Just reading about the deaths of the Apostles of Christ and the Apostles of Mohammed shows you how different they were. If you can’t see the difference between Islamic terrorist groups and Christian terrorist groups then read some history.

Correction most Islamic terrorist grouped kill heretical Muslims that they judge to be heretical based on Sharia sources, now depending on the sect or school of Islam that can obviously vary on who exactly is a heretic. Mohammed himself said that the blood of a Muslim can only be shed in three cases, for apostasy or heresy (the charge which Muslims for centuries have been accusing each other for to justify slaughtering each other, adultery, and murder. To Isis Muslims they kill are usually heretics in their eyes (such as Shia Muslims) and apostates, or they could be other Sunnis who are considered traitors for not supporting the Caliphate in which case they’re also considered apostates which makes there blood being shed halal. So who are you to say Isis is killing Muslims to them they’re killing traitors and apostates who oppose the Caliphate of Allah and his messenger which is allowed in Islam.

I still don’t find you anymore sincere, you claim to be an ambassador for truth, yet for your sake I hope you don’t know what your talking about. You did say that the Bible justifies colonialism in your previous post and suggested that it promotes Jew hatred.

After Muslims conquered North Africa they started subjugating tribes to the south and sending Islamic missionaries there to convert them. Eventually European colonial powers also started sending Christian missionaries of their own which resulted in a mixed Christian/Muslim divine in Africa. In countries where the Muslim population is either the majority or half of the population in say the case of Nigeria they always try to overtake the Christian population, we’ve seen this happening continuously, it doesn’t stop. We’ve seen it with Boko Haram, Al Shabab, and etc. Just a few days ago Al Shabab committed another terrorist attack, do you honestly think Christian terrorism (if you can even call it that) is as frequent or deadly as Islamic terrorism? In Africa it’s backfired on Muslim groups, as Christians started to make reprisals of their own and attacks of their own and these attacks turned them against the Muslim community. With Christians now becoming the majority in Africa, the Muslim community that’s spawned these groups have practically dug their own graves at this point.

Colonialism is a modern term used to describe an ancient practice that’s been going on for centuries. The Byzantine empire which is the Eastern continuation of the Roman Empire didn’t conquer any lands in its history it merely inherited the lands from the divided Roman Empire, pretty much all of its wars were spent on trying to defend itself or recover lost territory mostly from its Islamic aggressors. Islamic imperialism hasn’t stopped unlike every other empire, if you’ve actually read anything in Islamic history, it’s been like a nonstop tidal wave unlike any other ideology or belief system on earth, unlike other empires which conquer and either settle or collapse, the Islamic ones never stopped trying to conquer more and more like a tide of locusts. After all the Islamic Empire expanded more rapidly then any other empire in the history of this earth besides the Mongols, it went from stretching from Spain to modern day Pakistan in less then two hundred years, can you imagine an empire that size, even Alexander the Great himself stopped when he reached India, Islam even after all that tried to invade France and push further into India and tried to conquer Constantinople to invade Eastern Europe, all in less then two hundred years! After the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphate broke apart all of its successor states tried to do the same, from the Aghlaibids trying to invade southern Italy to a list I can’t even fit into ten posts. This is both remarkable and absolutely terrifying, and the dark truth is that it’s never actually stopped, it keeps continuing with a bam and a bam and a bam, over and over again nonstop.

Notice how Islam spread as an empire while Christianity spread within an empire that considered it an illegal faith on the run:

The two are definitely not equal.

Islam The Critical Stalemate re Violence in Islam

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads