• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is ISIL Islamic?

Is ISIL Islamic

  • Total voters
    59
ecofarm said:
Is Westboro Christian?
Click to expand...

Yes, they are...that's their label. Do I think they will be welcomed into Heaven with open arms from Christ? Heck no.

To say that ISIL isn't Islamic is just stupid. Of course they are. There are fanatical arms of every religion.
 
I didn't watch the Obama speech, but just curious...... did he mention the word "caliphate"?
 
Josie said:
I didn't watch the Obama speech, but just curious...... did he mention the word "caliphate"?
Click to expand...
I believe so. It's a key point to understand.
IS isn't just some "terrorist army" It govern territory, collects taxes, ( along with imposition of face veils, beheadings, crucifixions, looting and selling antiquities, etc.)
The caliphate is a long term goal, not just in Syria & Iraq

They even have: ( I can't find the source)

Sowing terror via Twitter
ISIS is by far the most media-savvy militant group to emerge in the Middle East.
Its social-media director is believed to be an American: Ahmad Abousamra, 33, a dual U.S.-Syrian citizen who was born in France and raised in the Boston area
 
The last caliphate ended with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, and establishing a state to be the home of the faithful has been the dream of Islamic fundamentalists for more than half a century.
Al-Baghdadi claims to trace his lineage to the Prophet Mohammed's Quraysh tribe, and his nom de guerre recalls the first caliph: Abu Bakr, father-in-law and close adviser of Mohammed.
In July, he addressed the world's Muslims in a sermon. "I am the wali [leader] who presides over you," al-Baghdadi said at the Grand Mosque in Mosul, Iraq. "Obey me as long as I obey God in you."
https://theweek.com/article/index/267920/abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-the-man-who-would-be-caliph
 
I recall when talking about an Islamic caliphate was worthy of eyerolls. Weird how things change...
 
Josie said:
I recall when talking about an Islamic caliphate was worthy of eyerolls. Weird how things change...
Click to expand...

it is still an idea worthy of an eyeroll and we should not give credence to ISIS"s delusions of granduer when we start addressing them as a caliphate.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
it is still an idea worthy of an eyeroll and we should not give credence to ISIS"s delusions of granduer when we start addressing them as a caliphate.
Click to expand...
they aren't. they're ambition is to become one. It's not delusional thought, anymore then any religion - it's also in the realm of possible
 
annata said:
they aren't. they're ambition is to become one. It's not delusional thought, anymore then any religion - it's also in the realm of possible
Click to expand...

i do not give legitimate credence to the ambition's of armed thugs. their ambition is delusional because they make claims like the one that they can conquer the city of rome, when they do not have the legitimacy of a representative government.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
i think you are talking about the puritans. they are a highly distilled brand of fundementalist christianity.
Click to expand...

Yes and I am using them as an example of the same type of fantacisim that we see in ISIS. Both refer(ed) to themselves as religious, as does the KKK see itself as a Christian organization, but when the shoe is put on the other foot, the entire religion (Islam) is seen as violent and dangerous.

The impetus of the OP is to challenge president Obama's opinion of what is Islamic and what is not. What he did with that statment was throw down the gauntlet on religious hate... That was a very important challenge to make, and I am taking to it's logical conclusion. Therefore, if the Salem witch hunters did not represent true Christianity, then it only stands to reason that ISIS and wahhabists do not represent true Islam.
 
Last edited:
Unitedwestand13 said:
i do not give legitimate credence to the ambition's of armed thugs. their ambition is delusional because they make claims like the one that they can conquer the city of rome, when they do not have the legitimacy of a representative government.
Click to expand...
that's past the ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq & the Levant) ability, yes.

I look at those Twitter pics as nothing more then propaganda to entice jihadi .
In truth even the (full) Levant is much too ambitious -but the caliphate is possible to carve out from Iraq/Syria/and perhaps smidges of Jordan, or Lebanon.

ISIS isn't a misnomer then.
 
upsideguy said:
You are making the argument that he should not have been a Pope, not that he was not a Pope. To the Catholics (which I am not), who get to decide who is Pope and who is not, he is considered to be the Rock upon which the church was built; the first Pope. Pope has no meaning, except to Catholics... they created the function. It is an office created by a religion. The office, by definition, is the lineage of Peter, hence he is the first.

I can make an argument that the Rosenbergs should not have been executed for spying. I can not make an argument (well, if I do, it would be a ridiculous one) that they were not executed for spying. Similarly, you really can't make the argument that he wasn't a Pope....and, really what difference does it make? Why would you care if the Catholics consider him a Pope or not?

Of course Peter was a Jew, which was my original point: Peter, the who is widely acknowledged as the first Pope, was a Jew. What is a Christian anyway, but someone that believes that Christ is the Messiah and thus is either a completed Jew or was grafted onto God's promise for his chosen people.
Click to expand...

The Catholic Church hadn't come into existence yet. Peter was a Jew, period, no matter what the Catholics claim. And no Jew would ever be a pope, and the Catholic Church would never draw a pope from the Jewish faith. Like I said, they claim Peter was a pope, because , Christ appointed him as the foundation, corner stone (Petra, rock) of the newly founded church, which was entirely of Jewish composition, until such time as it was revealed to Peter, through the metaphor of a sheet full of unclean animals, that the Gentiles should no longer be considered unclean. At which time, the apostle Paul was elected the apostle to the Gentiles, and he was sent out, including to Rome, which was when that city first heard the gospel. Sorry, but peter was no Catholic pope.
 
Last edited:
jet57 said:
Okay, then Christianity is a violent and dangerous religion.
Click to expand...

Some fringe Christian groups have been in the past and a few in the present, yes. I see what you're doing, but it doesn't work on me. I don't think Islam is a violent religion - it's an extreme percentage of Muslims who are violent and dangerous. Good effort, though.
 
Van Basten said:
Yes, crappy ones that don't care about emulating Jesus' example.
Click to expand...

People who use God's name for personal gain or the advancement of a]n agenda are not new....

However, judging 400 million people's faith based on the actions of a handful of brain damaged homophobic right wing extremists is really the same as judging all of Islam based on ISIS, or more correctly what the White House is feeding you about Islam. During Bush's rhetorical drive to invade Afghanistan there were people who believed that to be Muslim was terrorism. Muslims who had been neighbors were now being harassed. Commentators were citing passages of the Koran that didn't exist; today Jimmy Carter bringing a message of reconciliation and the need for the Islamic community to become more vocal in denouncing terrorism brings charges of "sleeping with the enemy" with citations of White House releases about "suspected ties" to this or that terrorist organization. They are taken as truth/gospel of the Bible of hate despite a record of incompetence in identifying anyone.

When you can create sufficient panic in the populace, they will surrender their rights faster than rats will eat each other; and that makes it so very more "efficient" in "getting things done"....
 
Josie said:
Some fringe Christian groups have been in the past and a few in the present, yes. I see what you're doing, but it doesn't work on me. I don't think Islam is a violent religion - it's an extreme percentage of Muslims who are violent and dangerous. Good effort, though.
Click to expand...

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that it's an extreme percentage?

And reality doesn't have to work on you if you don't want it to, but Christianity as a relgion has nothing to say about Islam. To this day radical Christians act out violently in the name of their version of God.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Actually they were all Jewish until Constantine...so was Jesus, he never converted to anything.
Click to expand...

Yep! Constantine was the one, at the council of Nicea (about 325) that made the proclamation that anyone caught worshipping on the sabbath day was anathema from Christ, and the Catholic Church was born.
 
Montecresto said:
Yep! Constantine was the one, at the council of Nicea (about 325) that made the proclamation that anyone caught worshipping on the sabbath day was anathema from Christ, and the Catholic Church was born.
Click to expand...



Which I believe was never intended by Jesus. He is rather specific about things and Acts bears that out.

It is when Connie converts that we see the church become The Church, built as a replica of the Roman Empire, including what would become "God's Representative on Earth" and later "infallible" that we see The Church become dictator of what everyone must believe. To make it palatable to the pagans, they adopted pagan ways, where "Patron Saints" replaced gods and titans who were said to rule such things as love, reason, the harvest and little defenseless animals.

then we take the Roman mass [Catholic means the universal church of Christ, all those who believe in the 3 fundamentals] and look at some Grecian practices which became Roman which became Catholic; the statuary, sometimes grotesque, the incense, and especially chanting and singing praises, none of which Jesus would have practiced. The concept of confession and repentance actually stems from pagan rites, where "priests" are paid to forgive wrongs against their gods....

just some "lite" theological rambling for a drizzly afternoon
 
jet57 said:
I don't know how you come to the conclusion that it's an extreme percentage?
Click to expand...

I don't know how you don't? Do you think that all Muslims are violent and dangerous?

jet57 said:
And reality doesn't have to work on you if you don't want it to, but Christianity as a relgion has nothing to say about Islam.
Click to expand...

Huh?

jet57 said:
To this day radical Christians act out violently in the name of their version of God.
Click to expand...

Yes, as I said there are fringe crazies in every religion. Islam just so happens to have the MOST crazies at this moment. Don't you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom