Is ISIS Proof that Islam has Failed at Peace?

[BADecker]

Some questions that have been on my mind, due to the discussions taking place on this board and the happenings in the Middle East:

1.  Is the rise of ISIS proof that Islam's "official" message of peace has failed?

Islam doesn't fail at peace. Peace is not really a part of Islam. Any religion that requires punishment for non-harm of others, is a religion of violence.

What is interesting is, in America, traffic laws and income taxes and many other things impose a penalty if they are not followed. The penalty is imposed even though nobody expresses that they have been harmed by not following these laws, and even though there is no evidence of harm. The American government has become a religion of punishment for no harm done, simply because government people have made some laws.

1.A.  Is a message of "peace" consistent with any religious group that claims a monopoly on the path to salvation, or is any violence in the name of a religion justifiable within the context of that religion's value system?

Violence without harm being done first is never justifiable. Certain punishment is justifiable if there is a teacher student relationship, and the student has agreed to the punishment when he fails. Violence without cause is wrong. A claim is merely a claim. A claim to a monopoly on salvation may be wrong, but it may also be non-violent.

2.  If "official" Islam preaches peace, why is a rogue sect of Islam with a violent ideology proving so successful in spreading such a blatantly anti-Islamic message to people who self-identify as Muslim?

Islam does not preach peace. Islam preaches no peace to people of other religions if they will not become Muslims. Islam may preach a semblance of peace between Muslims, but anywhere there is taxation rather than donation, peace is ultimately non-existent.

3.  Who is ultimately responsible for self-identified Muslims who propagate violence in the name of Islam?

Everyone is responsible for his own idiocy. However, because points of law can be difficult to determine, the Islamic cleric who teaches Muslims incorrectly is doubly wrong.

3.A.  In the marketplace of competing ideas, if the violent rogue ideology is more popular than the "official" peaceful ideology among people who call themselves Muslims in a given geographic area, does that suggest a failure of the peaceful ideology or the leaders of the peaceful ideology to engage these self-proclaimed Muslims and win their hearts and minds?

Yes, absolutely. The fact that Islam exists is just such a happening.

Islam started as a method for its followers to get more than a lion's share of the goods of this life, by taking it from others. The infusion of ideals that appear peaceful into Islam was to help Islam gain a foothold on the minds of people who would normally be peaceful.

4.  If we call ISIS' form of Islam false, what does it matter if they receive popular support from self-identified Muslims? (i.e. does subscribing to a violent version of Islam make them non-Muslims?)

Anybody can call anything, anything that they want. Calling Islam peaceful doesn't make it so.

4.A.  How can a group self-identify as Muslim or Islamic and hold values that differ so greatly from what other Muslims consider to be legitimate to the religion?

By rewriting the Islamic religious writings to eliminate the violence, or by writing some new, peaceful, religious writings, and then calling them "Islam."

[1714752200]

1714752200

[1714752200]

1714752200

[1714752200]

1714752200

[Bitcoin Billionaire]

Currently, ISIS does not represent Islam. Rather, their own plan has been made attractive to them, and they have been averted from the way. And whoever Allah leaves astray - there will be for him no guide.

Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in their hearts.

[salinizm]

Some questions that have been on my mind, due to the discussions taking place on this board and the happenings in the Middle East:

1.  Is the rise of ISIS proof that Islam's "official" message of peace has failed?
1.A.  Is a message of "peace" consistent with any religious group that claims a monopoly on the path to salvation, or is any violence in the name of a religion justifiable within the context of that religion's value system?

2.  If "official" Islam preaches peace, why is a rogue sect of Islam with a violent ideology proving so successful in spreading such a blatantly anti-Islamic message to people who self-identify as Muslim?

3.  Who is ultimately responsible for self-identified Muslims who propagate violence in the name of Islam?
3.A.  In the marketplace of competing ideas, if the violent rogue ideology is more popular than the "official" peaceful ideology among people who call themselves Muslims in a given geographic area, does that suggest a failure of the peaceful ideology or the leaders of the peaceful ideology to engage these self-proclaimed Muslims and win their hearts and minds?

4.  If we call ISIS' form of Islam false, what does it matter if they receive popular support from self-identified Muslims? (i.e. does subscribing to a violent version of Islam make them non-Muslims?)
4.A.  How can a group self-identify as Muslim or Islamic and hold values that differ so greatly from what other Muslims consider to be legitimate to the religion?

Thoughts/answers to the above?

isis or any islamic terrorists organisations dont represent true islam.. islamic precept teach us how to live in this world peacefully..

[croato]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

[BADecker]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

^Ditto^

Yes! ISIS isn't proof that Islam has failed at peace. ISIS is proof that Islam is what it is, VIOLENT!

[kuroman]

Some questions that have been on my mind, due to the discussions taking place on this board and the happenings in the Middle East:

1.  Is the rise of ISIS proof that Islam's "official" message of peace has failed?
1.A.  Is a message of "peace" consistent with any religious group that claims a monopoly on the path to salvation, or is any violence in the name of a religion justifiable within the context of that religion's value system?

2.  If "official" Islam preaches peace, why is a rogue sect of Islam with a violent ideology proving so successful in spreading such a blatantly anti-Islamic message to people who self-identify as Muslim?

3.  Who is ultimately responsible for self-identified Muslims who propagate violence in the name of Islam?
3.A.  In the marketplace of competing ideas, if the violent rogue ideology is more popular than the "official" peaceful ideology among people who call themselves Muslims in a given geographic area, does that suggest a failure of the peaceful ideology or the leaders of the peaceful ideology to engage these self-proclaimed Muslims and win their hearts and minds?

4.  If we call ISIS' form of Islam false, what does it matter if they receive popular support from self-identified Muslims? (i.e. does subscribing to a violent version of Islam make them non-Muslims?)
4.A.  How can a group self-identify as Muslim or Islamic and hold values that differ so greatly from what other Muslims consider to be legitimate to the religion?

Thoughts/answers to the above?

The simple answer is NO, because if statically speaking, violence existed, exist and will always do, in human societies no matter what, but there are factor that can increase violence obviously, I don't think it's related to Islam as per se but the chaotic situation in the middle east makes a whole region prone to violence.

The fact is in the islamic world you have many countries that are peacefull and proof of the "Islam is religion of peace" but at the same time you have the exact opposite in some areas where religion is used as a tool to achieve something as well as other ideologies.

[kuroman]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

^Ditto^

Yes! ISIS isn't proof that Islam has failed at peace. ISIS is proof that Islam is what it is, VIOLENT!

By same logic, Nazi germany is a proof that western culture is VIOLENT
KKK is proof, that white american are racist and VIOLENT
.........

I can go on and on, but don't you see the flaw with this logic?

[croato]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

^Ditto^

Yes! ISIS isn't proof that Islam has failed at peace. ISIS is proof that Islam is what it is, VIOLENT!

By same logic, Nazi germany is a proof that western culture is VIOLENT
KKK is proof, that white american are racist and VIOLENT
.........

I can go on and on, but don't you see the flaw with this logic?

I dont see any logic there mate. Nazi Germany did not represent western culture, in fact most of western countries were part of allies who defeated nazis and KKK was never running USA or even represent most of white Americans. Islam on other hand, since that desert demon possessed that Muhammad guy is nothing but violence. Just look how civil right stand in most developed Islam countries today and imagine how it was in past centuries.

[Spendulus]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

^Ditto^

Yes! ISIS isn't proof that Islam has failed at peace. ISIS is proof that Islam is what it is, VIOLENT!

By same logic, Nazi germany is a proof that western culture is VIOLENT
KKK is proof, that white american are racist and VIOLENT
.........

I can go on and on, but don't you see the flaw with this logic?

I dont see any logic there mate. Nazi Germany did not represent western culture, in fact most of western countries were part of allies who defeated nazis and KKK was never running USA or even represent most of white Americans. Islam on other hand, since that desert demon possessed that Muhammad guy is nothing but violence. Just look how civil right stand in most developed Islam countries today and imagine how it was in past centuries.

You have a point.

Western culture does not exactly claim to be perfect, and does not claim to be peace.

However Islam claims to be perfect, and Islam claims to be peace.

Yet the production of cultures of peace, and cultures of violence, from the Judeo Christian beliefs and those of Islam, do seem to be reversed.

[BADecker]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

^Ditto^

Yes! ISIS isn't proof that Islam has failed at peace. ISIS is proof that Islam is what it is, VIOLENT!

By same logic, Nazi germany is a proof that western culture is VIOLENT
KKK is proof, that white american are racist and VIOLENT
.........

I can go on and on, but don't you see the flaw with this logic?

The only reason you think this way is because you don't know what Islam and ISIS are. If you knew, you would pity the Muslims. The Islam clerics attempt to hide the truth from all people, because they have an easy life from stealing tax money from Muslims... money demanded by the religion.

[kuroman]

Islam is not peaceful at first place so ISIS is just proof on that. There is not even pace between different Islam fractions so we "infidels" cant expect any good from them. Wake up ppl, Islam is not about peace and prosperity and ISIS is just tip of iceberg.

^Ditto^

Yes! ISIS isn't proof that Islam has failed at peace. ISIS is proof that Islam is what it is, VIOLENT!

By same logic, Nazi germany is a proof that western culture is VIOLENT
KKK is proof, that white american are racist and VIOLENT
.........

I can go on and on, but don't you see the flaw with this logic?

I dont see any logic there mate. Nazi Germany did not represent western culture, in fact most of western countries were part of allies who defeated nazis and KKK was never running USA or even represent most of white Americans. Islam on other hand, since that desert demon possessed that Muhammad guy is nothing but violence. Just look how civil right stand in most developed Islam countries today and imagine how it was in past centuries.

It is exactly the same logic and if you fail to see it you are just in denial, but lets see, you say that western countries stood against Nazi germany, but then again the western world was split in two camps, and they fought because they were treatned to be taken over, if Nazi germany was expanding to those countries you think anyone would care to what cruel and violent things Nazi germany was doing (not like our countries weren't doing similar massacres in their colonies at the same periode but that's another point) , I still didn't answer your argument yet to show how your logic has a flaw and here is your answer, who do you think is fighting and suffering the most from ISIS, you ? your country? obviously not, it is muslims in the region, ISIS killed over 200k muslims according to the most conservative statistics and the numbers are raising exponentially.

Also you claim that the KKK was never running in the USA or represent the white American, which totally wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan they them self claims to represent white people supremacy in the US as does ISIS claims to represent the supremacy of Islam in the middle east, but the FACT is ISIS which is at most 100K barbarian (and most are mercenaries that are recruited by money and doesn't even read arabic or the Koran) compared to 1.5 to 2Billion muslims? that's about 0.05% total, how can such number represent the majority ?

As for your claim that Mohammed is violent or whatever please read and understand the Koran before spouting nonsense, your information comes from websites and TV where they quote a part and disregard 99% of the book which is stupid and far from being intellectually correct

[Pkzone]

Some questions that have been on my mind, due to the discussions taking place on this board and the happenings in the Middle East:

1.  Is the rise of ISIS proof that Islam's "official" message of peace has failed?
1.A.  Is a message of "peace" consistent with any religious group that claims a monopoly on the path to salvation, or is any violence in the name of a religion justifiable within the context of that religion's value system?

2.  If "official" Islam preaches peace, why is a rogue sect of Islam with a violent ideology proving so successful in spreading such a blatantly anti-Islamic message to people who self-identify as Muslim?

3.  Who is ultimately responsible for self-identified Muslims who propagate violence in the name of Islam?
3.A.  In the marketplace of competing ideas, if the violent rogue ideology is more popular than the "official" peaceful ideology among people who call themselves Muslims in a given geographic area, does that suggest a failure of the peaceful ideology or the leaders of the peaceful ideology to engage these self-proclaimed Muslims and win their hearts and minds?

4.  If we call ISIS' form of Islam false, what does it matter if they receive popular support from self-identified Muslims? (i.e. does subscribing to a violent version of Islam make them non-Muslims?)
4.A.  How can a group self-identify as Muslim or Islamic and hold values that differ so greatly from what other Muslims consider to be legitimate to the religion?

Thoughts/answers to the above?

No, the last several thousand years have proven that islam fails at peace.  As a matter of fact, World history has shown that just about every religion fails at peace.   Religion creates an "us vs them" mentality which is usually problematic for the whole peace thing.

The truth lies above.

[Spendulus]

Some questions that have been on my mind, due to the discussions taking place on this board and the happenings in the Middle East:

1.  Is the rise of ISIS proof that Islam's "official" message of peace has failed?
1.A.  Is a message of "peace" consistent with any religious group that claims a monopoly on the path to salvation, or is any violence in the name of a religion justifiable within the context of that religion's value system?

2.  If "official" Islam preaches peace, why is a rogue sect of Islam with a violent ideology proving so successful in spreading such a blatantly anti-Islamic message to people who self-identify as Muslim?

3.  Who is ultimately responsible for self-identified Muslims who propagate violence in the name of Islam?
3.A.  In the marketplace of competing ideas, if the violent rogue ideology is more popular than the "official" peaceful ideology among people who call themselves Muslims in a given geographic area, does that suggest a failure of the peaceful ideology or the leaders of the peaceful ideology to engage these self-proclaimed Muslims and win their hearts and minds?

4.  If we call ISIS' form of Islam false, what does it matter if they receive popular support from self-identified Muslims? (i.e. does subscribing to a violent version of Islam make them non-Muslims?)
4.A.  How can a group self-identify as Muslim or Islamic and hold values that differ so greatly from what other Muslims consider to be legitimate to the religion?

Thoughts/answers to the above?

No, the last several thousand years have proven that islam fails at peace.  As a matter of fact, World history has shown that just about every religion fails at peace.   Religion creates an "us vs them" mentality which is usually problematic for the whole peace thing.

The truth lies above.

Or below.

www.thereligionofpeace.com

[BADecker]

See? Even Spendy agrees that ISIS is proof that Islam has succeeded^^^, just not at peace.

[mohsin qureshi]

I dont think so that ISLAM itself responsible for terror, or failed to spread the peace. If some people make a group and start fight against the world, then they clearly deny the actual techings of Islam. Islam never preach to kill ANY one due to ANY reason. There are some reasons behind such extreamist groups like Afghan War. Everyonw knows so many millitants join Taliban in the reaction of Afghan war. Same in Iraq, the instability is still exist both countries. So these are the reasons which is somehow true. But still i said EVERY person who killed any other on the name of Islam, not on the right way.

[Daniel91]

For me ISIS is just proof how some people use religion for their own interest or agenda, to mobilize young and naive Muslims to fight against their Christian brothers and friends, against their families and countries etc.
ISIS is evil but have no relationship with Islam.

[Spendulus]

For me ISIS is just proof how some people use religion for their own interest or agenda, to mobilize young and naive Muslims to fight against their Christian brothers and friends, against their families and countries etc.
ISIS is evil but have no relationship with Islam.

How about the other 82 organizations on UAE's list of Islamic terror groups?  Do they also have no relationship with Islam?  I guess that UAE thinks they do, since they call them "Islamic terror organisations."

Abu Dhabi (AFP) - The United Arab Emirates, which belongs to a US-led coalition fighting jihadists, on Saturday issued a list of 83 Islamist groups which it classified as "terrorist organisations".

The list, approved by the cabinet and published on the official WAM news agency, is similar to an announcement made by Riyadh in March.

It blacklists Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (IS), as well as the Muslim Brotherhood and Yemen's Shiite Huthi militia.

[ACAB]

If you think deep about religions any of the books offer peace though. They all want you to turn people from other religions to their own religion. Christianity do the same, only Jews do different, you can't become jew but they still run the world. ISIS is the live proof of 6th century Islam in 21st century. How they do it is the same as in history. You can't blame for them, they just apply what's written in the book.

[Spendulus]

If you think deep about religions any of the books offer peace though. They all want you to turn people from other religions to their own religion. Christianity do the same, only Jews do different, you can't become jew but they still run the world. ISIS is the live proof of 6th century Islam in 21st century. How they do it is the same as in history. You can't blame for them, they just apply what's written in the book.

Minor note (and I'm not advocating religion or conversion) yes you can become a Jew (and then Help Run the World) or find out that actually they don't run the world but only a few hot dog stands.

[Boelens]

What many of you seem to be not understanding is that just because someone (or a group) identifies as a Muslim it doesn't mean that their actions represent Islam

ISIS' version of "Islam" is just an excuse to justify their own agenda and get more people on their side. They do so much that goes against the Quran that it would be straight up stupid to think of them as representers of it.