Does Islam Promote Violence?

[dave0293]

The 9/11 terrorist attacks and all the violence in the Middle East and South Asia, has made me wonder: Does Islam promote violence? On one side, some state that terrorism and violence are present in many Muslim nations, that Islamic terrorism is based on faith and Islam is used to justify some terrorists acts, some Muslim religious leaders promote violence, and the Quran and Muhammad promote violence. On the other side, many state that Jihad means striving instead of holy war, verses from the Quran are often misquoted, the media seems to have a double standard regarding Islam, and that as Islam is a religion that is not widely understood in the United States, Islam has falsely been described as promoting violence.

 

In my opinion, while it is hard to deny that many who adhere to Islam behave violently, and some use Islam to justify violence, it doesn't change the fact that religions do not promote violence, man promotes violence; most every philosophy can been used to justify violent behavior. Islam is no different in its violent history from any other philosophy, or religion, with many similarities to other religions.

 

Its seems hard to have an open view on a topic where the media has a bias view, where the west seems to believe that Islam promotes violence, without knowing the true nature of Islam. Sadly, as I do not yet know enough about the religion to form an intelligent opinion, I have written this topic wondering your opinion.

 

Discuss. Does Islam promote violence?

[Stilev]

no;

 

 

 

way to much effort to explain it all, someone else will

[Faux]

Uhhh, the Crusades? Just thought I'd be the first to mention that...

 

 

 

Care to expand on your post? Tread carefully because I will rip your post apart.

[mmmcannibalism]

my advice would be to try and find a text copy of the qu'ran(spelling) online and read over it for yourself. I doubt Islam promotes violence inherently any more then Christianity does inherently. As for the spin of religious sects, I feel within this limited time frame that Islam is currently a little bit more violence promoting.

[Lenticular_J]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

 

 

Sorry, but you're extremely ignorant of anything involving Islam. Islam promotes violence no more than Axe body spray promotes teen abstinence.

 

 

 

Uhhh, the Crusades? Just thought I'd be the first to mention that...

 

What, yet another war for power and wealth? One of, I dunno ... MILLIONS?

 

 

 

EDIT: Oh, wait, I guess I shouldn't laugh. You admitted being ignorant to the matter. My bad.

[raven_gaurd0]

The 9/11 terrorist attacks and all the violence in the Middle East and South Asia, has made me wonder: Does Islam promote violence? On one side, some state that terrorism and violence are present in many Muslim nations, that Islamic terrorism is based on faith and Islam is used to justify some terrorists acts, some Muslim religious leaders promote violence, and the Quran and Muhammad promote violence. On the other side, many state that Jihad means striving instead of holy war, verses from the Quran are often misquoted, the media seems to have a double standard regarding Islam, and that as Islam is a religion that is not widely understood in the United States, Islam has falsely been described as promoting violence.

 

In my opinion, while it is hard to deny that many who adhere to Islam behave violently, and some use Islam to justify violence, it doesn't change the fact that religions do not promote violence, man promotes violence; most every philosophy can been used to justify violent behavior. Islam is no different in its violent history from any other philosophy, or religion, with many similarities to other religions.

 

Its seems hard to have an open view on a topic where the media has a bias view, where the west seems to believe that Islam promotes violence, without knowing the true nature of Islam. Sadly, as I do not yet know enough about the religion to form an intelligent opinion, I have written this topic wondering your opinion.

 

Discuss. Does Islam promote violence?

 

 

 

I've never read the Qu'ran in it's entirety, but I have read almost all verses that were in question, like from the Book of Light, and yes they are often misquoted.

 

 

 

No. Islam does not promote violence. Stupid Muslims who don't deserve the title promote violence.

 

 

 

 

Its seems hard to have an open view on a topic where the media has a bias view

 

 

That's why half of Tip.It hates me. :cry:

 

Muhammad never really promoted violence, either. By the way. I mean, like the Bible, there are actual battle instructions, but it's something you'd expect. For example, one of the books has; "Do not turn your back on the infidel on the battlefield; fight without cessation until he is slain." Now, this can be interpreted as violence-promoting, but really, it's tactical: DO NOT TURN YOUR BACK ON THE ENEMY. It really isn't even that mind-numbing of a concept.

 

 

 

P.S. Roccodog25, you are, in fact, a moron. That was a war AGAINST my Muslim brothers. Please, before you post, refrain and instead watch more of your 'News with BOXXY'.

[Mr_Adam]

I am FAIRLY SURE that Islam in itself is a peaceful religion. However, when followed completely down to the letter (the way that extremists follow the Qu'ran) the teaching is to eradicate religions that don't believe in Allah.

 

Note that Islam believes that Allah is the same god as the Christian/Jewish God/Yahweh.

 

 

 

Therefore, most Muslims are cool with other religions. In the Arab Empire (Largest Empire before the Roman, I believe), people in conquered lands would have the choice to convert to Islam (since Islam doesn't allow forced conversion). One record recalls of how the Islam leader Sarazin gave the Christian leader Richard the Lionhearted food supplies during the Third Crusade - because Islam teaches to help the unfortunate (alms).

 

 

 

I hope I cleared a few things up, and that I didn't ramble.

[Mr_Adam]

Uhhh, the Crusades? Just thought I'd be the first to mention that...

 

 

 

 

 

Crusades was the Christians, seeking essentially power and wealth.

 

All of them failed but one.

 

Also, May I remind you of the Children's Crusade?

[dave0293]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

 

 

Sorry, but you're extremely ignorant of anything involving Islam. Islam promotes violence no more than Axe body spray promotes teen abstinence.

 

 

Just playing devils advocate:

 

So it's just coincidence that violence pervades in the Muslim world?

 

http://www.systemicpeace.org/PC2005.pdf

 

Are definitions of Jihad all misinterpretations? It seems from some passages that the Qu'ran promotes violence.

 

Is it just coincidence that suicide bombers follow the Quran? That Islamic terrorism is faith-based?

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52184

 

Even if Islam doesn't promote violence, it certainly seems to be used to justify it.

[raven_gaurd0]

It's a grossly misused justification. If I killed a civilian, then used Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War' to justify my act of total war, would it be justified? Of course not. Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War' doesn't even promote the spontaneous killing of everybody, and is mostly about disciplining troops and staying OUT of war.

 

 

 

P.S. The Children's crusade was terrible. Terribly FALSE. Most historians believe that the Children's Crusade was mostly poor people making a pilgrimage to the Holy Lands, and others trying to convert the Muslims to Christianity. Hardly bloody at all. Well, bloody, but not in comparison.

[ThurinEthir]

 

Therefore, most Muslims are cool with other religions. In the Arab Empire (Largest Empire before the Roman, I believe), people in conquered lands would have the choice to convert to Islam (since Islam doesn't allow forced conversion). One record recalls of how the Islam leader Sarazin gave the Christian leader Richard the Lionhearted food supplies during the Third Crusade - because Islam teaches to help the unfortunate (alms).

 

 

Largest after the Romans, before the Mongols. I think.

 

I find Islam to be used as a justification (wrongly, I'd say), rather than a reason, for violence.

 

There is no correct interpretation of the Qu'ran, so some will take it literally and say it promotes violence. It all depends on how you interpret it, though most Muslims do not promote violence.

[i_love_burritos]

Just a observation.

 

 

 

[hide=You may be offended (I hope not)]Why is it that wherever that Islam shares a border with another country, there is violence and civil unrest ?

 

Why doesn't any other religion have such fanatical followers, on a scale that Islam has ?

 

What about basic human rights that Islam denys, acid being thrown in faces of school girls, stoning, torture.[/hide]

 

 

 

Not Pro, or Anti Islam, just an astute observer who wishes to make up his own mind.

[sohkmj1]

No. I don't even want to expand on this. Just no. I'm not saying this because I am from a multi-social country. Don't be so ignorant. Go read their Qu'ran. I'd like you to point out a single sentence in there that states anything along the lines of "WE MUST DESTROY ALL WHO ARE NOT LIKE US". When you do please tell me.

[Lenticular_J]

Just playing devils advocate:

 

So it's just coincidence that violence pervades in the Muslim world?

 

http://www.systemicpeace.org/PC2005.pdf

 

Are definitions of Jihad all misinterpretations? It seems from some passages that the Qu'ran promotes violence.

 

Is it just coincidence that suicide bombers follow the Quran? That Islamic terrorism is faith-based?

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52184

 

Even if Islam doesn't promote violence, it certainly seems to be used to justify it.

 

Sorry for the [bleep] move back there. You aren't purposefully ignorant or anything.

 

 

 

Islam is just the youngest, large religion thus far. Not to mention its starting place. For example, Judaism. The eldest of the Big Three. Jews were slaves for quite some time, and then, eradicated Arabs from their holy land of Israel. Wars followed for quite some time, and there was no true and solely Jewish motive, unless you count the want for Israel as holy. To be truthful, that area is the hottest culture hearth ever.

 

 

 

Christianity - same thing, really. Early Christians had it rough. Soon, it was a large religion, and wars were called supposedly in the name of Christ.

 

 

 

I believe it's really just the area and its history that promote so much violence. Perhaps if those three religions were founded in Asia, things would be more peaceful ...

 

 

 

Anyhow. The violence throughout the Muslim world is, in my view, due to the plain strife all around there. One of the richest areas in the world, clashes between Africa, Asia, and Europe, constant conquerings; of course they're itching for a fight. It was that way following Muhammed's death. One slip of the tongue from him, who I believe didn't actually want blood shed in the name of Allah, and now there are rampaging armies of Muslims throughout Europe, Asia, and Africa, for decades.

 

 

 

Now, as for violent passages, yes, there are. But there are just as many peaceful ones. The Koran was primarily written in the early to middle Middle Ages - it's both a book of defense of your faith and how to worship in peaceful times and with brother faiths. Now, there aren't exactly a whole lot of peaceful times for Muslims, so those parts are occasionally ignored.

 

 

 

I believe it is definitely a coincidence, on some part. All terrorism is motivated by some sort of belief, usually religious. I believe I already explained why Islamic terror is large.

 

 

 

Of course it can justify it. Justifying is a loose term these days.

 

 

 

Whew. I'm done.

[dragoonson]

Uhhh, the Crusades? Just thought I'd be the first to mention that...

 

 

 

Some points I CBA to form into a proper answer.

 

 

 

-Egyptian Muslims ruled Jerusalem for a time in peace.

 

-Turkish Muslims took over

 

-Pope Urban II declares a crusade to save the church's slipping reputation

 

 

 

Why is it that wherever that Islam shares a border with another country, there is violence and civil unrest ?

 

Why doesn't any other religion have such fanatical followers, on a scale that Islam has ?

 

What about basic human rights that Islam denys, acid being thrown in faces of school girls, stoning, torture.

 

 

 

We are bordered by Malaysia and Indonesia,both of which are muslim.The latest "civil unrest" we had was over a small island MUCH smaller than many rocks.

 

 

 

The Tamil Tigers have terrorised Indonesia.China has a Muslim state.Phillipines has a bunch of muslims fighting for their liberty.Stifling governments. Also,not reading Harry Potter because its "Anti-Christian"?

 

 

 

Torture?How was Saddam held?How was your Jesus killed?Every religion has restrictions,you know.

 

 

 

Acid being thrown in their faces would be the teacher's problem,not the religion's.If every free thinker was peace loving,and I was the only one who beat people up,would it be the fault of my beliefs?

[Dire_Wolf]

If Islam promoted violence then every muslim in world would be violent...

 

 

 

But that's not the case, so no.

 

 

 

Just because some idiots socalled "Terrorist" do stupid things to innocent people does not mean all muslims or even muslims religion is like that.

[Kimberly]

Every religion has a sect that promotes some sort of extremist views.

 

 

 

This is a universal truth.

[JIM]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

 

 

Sorry, but you're extremely ignorant of anything involving Islam. Islam promotes violence no more than Axe body spray promotes teen abstinence.

 

 

Just playing devils advocate:

 

So it's just coincidence that violence pervades in the Muslim world?

 

http://www.systemicpeace.org/PC2005.pdf

 

Are definitions of Jihad all misinterpretations? It seems from some passages that the Qu'ran promotes violence.

 

Is it just coincidence that suicide bombers follow the Quran? That Islamic terrorism is faith-based?

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52184

 

Even if Islam doesn't promote violence, it certainly seems to be used to justify it.

 

 

 

Ignorance is bliss eh?

 

 

 

Try taking a look outside. Violence is hardly contained to the muslim world.

 

 

 

Islam doesn't promote violence any more than christianity does. It does advocate defense of their own however, what's wrong with that?

 

 

 

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Iraqi muslims lay dead in the streets of Iraq. The victims of Christian nations sent to their country for a lie.

 

 

 

Don't you think a pre-emptive military strike (IE. The US vs. Iraq) promotes violence more than a few passages in the Qu'ran advocating defense and (as someone mentioned previously) battle tactics?

[assassin_696]

The Qu'ran does, but I don't think Islam as a religion does.

[Lenticular_J]

Well, I could make two points here...

 

 

 

1) So you're saying there has never been a war where Christians tried to eradicate non believers?

 

 

 

or...

 

 

 

2) They claimed Christianity was the reson the Crusades occured. Do you really think terrorists only do what they do because of Islam?

 

1. I never said that there's never been a war where someone of one religion killed someone of another. I said that that has never been the cause of strife. Personal beliefs are not causes for war. They never have been and likely never will be.

 

 

 

2. I don't understand what exactly you're saying, kinda bad wording. But, no. They do it because someone above them took a notion that they would be better off if they told others that killing themselves and others is what God would want. Therefore, the notions of war are purely man made.

 

 

 

The Qu'ran does, but I don't think Islam as a religion does.

 

You really think so? I find it a bit more violent than, say, the Bible, but it's relatively mellow compared to much of the Torah. Then again, viewpoints can change with age - you've got a good couple of years on me.

[Omar]

Islam doesn't cause violence, people do.

[Marco]

The Problem with Interpretation & Religion

 

 

 

Anything can be interpreted in any way.

 

 

 

This is one of the biggest problems that I find with religion; the 'holy' books that so many people base their lives on are written by dead men, translated into 'X' language for the purpose of convenience, and then interpreted to the masses by 'X' current holy leader (be it priest, rabbi, imam etc) who he himself will have 'X' views on what is right and wrong. There are so many opportunities for deviation from what was actually intended at the time of writing.

 

 

 

You read what you want to read. One man may read that the Bible clearly implies that God is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Another man may take a more literal reading of the Bible and would be able to shake the very grounds of modern christianity, simply by asking where in the Bible it expressesly claims the existence of the Holy Trinity.

 

 

 

I could read a passage in the Qur'an as an express statement specifically allowing me to take violent action against an infidel, while another man reads that same passage as something similar to what raven_gaurd0. My interpretation does not mean that the Qur'an incites violence. It simply means that my interpretation of that passage in the Qur'an incites violence. I don't see why people can't understand this.

 

 

 

Islam doesn't promote violence any more than christianity does.

 

In my opinion, JIM hit the nail on the head here. Any bloodshed or violent acts caused in the name of Islam is matched with acts from Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism etc.

 

 

 

Quick look at how interpretation affects the law

 

(quite academic, skip if you don't want to deviate from this topic)

 

Bear in mind, that earlier this afternoon I had a Public Law lecture on 'Freedom of Expression' and the issues surronding it, so this is very fresh in my mind. (5 months into the Public Law part of my Law degree. LLB)

 

 

As the famous quote says: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"

 

Who are the 'terrorists' here, and who are simply 'freedom fighters': Nelson Mandela? Tony Blair? Osama Bin Ladin? George Bush? Saddam Hussain? Is it really as clear cut as you think?

 

 

 

On the issue of interpretation; in my lecture today, we were told to read through an article written by the Archbishop of York, Jonh Sentamu regarding bringing an end to Robert Mugabe's regime. What seems like an article calling for a much needed end to a corrupt and disgusting system of 'democracy' in Zimbabwe was shown by the lecturer as fulfilling all the necassery criteria to be prosecuted under the 'Terrorism Act 2000', thus making the Archbishop of York a terrorist. It is clear that he is in no danger whatsoever of being prosecuted, however, due to (among other things) public policy. The same kind of public policy which succeeded in restricting access to the UK for Geert Wilders, the Dutch maker of an "Anti-Islamic" film claiming that it clearly incites violence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On this topic, and general misunderstandings

 

 

 

Islam does not promote violence. Certain interpretations of the Qur'an may promote violence to the individual that reads it as if a self-fulfilling prophecy by the reader.

 

 

 

 

 

It frustrates me how easily people can be mislead, especially in huge nations like China & USA (over-reactive media, poor network reporting, government misinformation etc). It sickens me that sensational media reporting and corrupt government policies cause people to actually question whether or not an age-old religion such as this actually promotes violence, while not even looking in on your own nation's actions.

 

****Although it will as ever go unheeded, I still cannot stress this enough; Do not form a strong opinion on something unless you feel you are properly and well informed. Do not rely on the mass media to form your views on particular issues. If you are interested in a particular area of life I stronlgy advise you to simply research it before coming to an assumption. If you have no interest in a particular area then try to stay neutral and uninfluenced by those around you until you can atleast have a balanced view.****

 

 

 

 

 

(Apologies for the weak structure and links; I'm writting this in the middle of a coursework so a little off-focus) #-o

[Faux]

The Qu'ran does' date=' but I don't think Islam as a religion does.[/quote']

 

You really think so? I find it a bit more violent than, say, the Bible, but it's relatively mellow compared to much of the Torah. Then again, viewpoints can change with age - you've got a good couple of years on me.

 

 

 

FYI, Torah is part of the Hebrew Bible which is the Old Testament of the Christian Bible.

 

 

 

What makes the Bible more violent than the Torah? The New Testament? That's funny.

[Lenticular_J]

I like calling the New Testament the Bible and the Old Testament the Torah. Makes me feel all smart-like.

 

 

 

And yeah, I find the Old Testament more violent. The New Testament revolves around Jesus and parables, where the Old Testament is all about God casting you into fire and brimstone.

[Roberthree]

islam is violent just like god hates gays.