Islam could become Europe’s dominant religion

[Bulgaroctonus]

The unfortunate issue is that Islam cannot evolve.

The things that are contained in the Koran is not open to debate. It is final. It is the word of Allah. Even if it was interpreted by a man Moahmmed in a cave.And interestingly, Mohammed was an illiterate and it was written by someone else which Mohammed could never have corrected, being unlettered.

Then there are the Hadith etc which is the way Mohammed lived and which have to be followed! There are good things there, but then what is goose for the gander (Mohemmaed) need not be suitable for you!

Sir,

Please cite your source for the illiteracy of Muhammad. I cannot remember that fact. He was a merchant and probably had motivation to learn a language. Furthermore, I believe that it is Muslim doctrine that Muhammad did not interpret the word of God, he recited it. In the first Sura begins thus in A.J. Arberry's 1955 translation:

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

Alif Lam Mim

That is the book, wherein is no doubt,
a guidance to the godfearing
who believe in the Unseen, and perform the prayer,
and expend of that We have provided them;
and believe in what has been sent to thee
and was has been sent down before thee,
and have faith in the Hereafter;
those are upon guidance from their Lord,
those are the ones who prosper.

I bolded the word 'sent' because it illustrates my point. The Qur'an is believed to the word of God, existing from before time (in Arabic I believe) and recited by Muhammad in the period of 610-32 AD.

Of course, I think of the supernatural ideas of Muhammad were false and that he was a liar. Islam as a philosophical system does not correctly solve the largest questions, although I have read some Muslim theological treatises and they are quite interesting in their dialectical patterns.

The reason we should pay attention to Islam is that it is a power social glue and motivator of human actions.

I intend to comment on the issue of Muslims in Europe in due time. I want to do more research so I can have some figures for the post.

Regards,

Bulgaroctonus

[Ray]

[QUOTE]

Sir,

Please cite your source for the illiteracy of Muhammad. I cannot remember that fact. He was a merchant and probably had motivation to learn a language.

Those who follow the Apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures), - in the Law and the Gospel . . . so believe in God and his Apostle, the unlettered Prophet. Surah 7.157, 158.


There is also a theory that Moahmmed emphasised his being unlettered so that the word of God that he heard appeared to be a miracle and so more outstandingly enthralling in those times when a large majority were illiterates or to be more precise, unlettered!

Furthermore, I believe that it is Muslim doctrine that Muhammad did not interpret the word of God, he recited it.

I believe so.

[Bulgaroctonus]

Members,

Before I am occupied writing my own post, I need to say a few things.

I largely agree with Ray. The concept of 'itjihad' or inner jihad appears to be a notion that apologists for Islam pulled out of the hat. While some very penitent Muslims, perhaps Sufis, engaged in the introspection and personal cleansing that comes with the inner jihad, I think it is a phenomenon that does not have much of a following.

The jihad we should be worried about is the one that is focused against non-Muslims, and it is viewed by Muslims as a continuation of the historical struggle of the Ummah, or Muslim community, against the infidels. In other words, a clash between the House of Submission (Dar al-Islam) and the everyone else , who are known as the House of War (Dar al-Harb). The only quick source I could find for those divisions is Wikipedia, because I lack a hard copy of Muslim theology outside the Qur'an. I will try to find a better source.

Suffice it to say, Islam is violent religion. It is almost irrelevant what the Qur'an says, because what matters is its interpretation. Similarly, the Old Testament (and New to a lesser extent) have many passages of intolerance and hatred, but they are largely ignored by Jews and Christians today. Christian fundamentalist violence, especially as has been cited on this thread, is not a trend and consists of only a few anecdotal instances.

Islam is major competitive, missionary religion. It was written in a period of war between Muhammad and the Meccans. Why should there be an expectation that it is a peaceful document? It was written in what was, and remains a violent world. Moreover, the violence of its followers made it powerful.

Ultimately, I view most things within the human sphere as a conforming to social Darwinism. Islam is strong, and getting stronger, because it has proven itself more fit than other ideologies. It had destroyed or assimilated competing ideas, and many Muslim countries are reproducing at the fastest rates on Earth. The organism, or the ideology, that can propagate to the most successful extent will be the victor. This is how Christianity became strong, and it will become submissive to Islam if it does not remember that major religions, just like great civilizations, and inherently bound on coercion and atrocities.

It is foolish to look within Islam for reform, much less negotiate with Muslims. That is usually a method of appeasement or denial, hiding from the truth that Islam is not interested in accommodation with the West, but is instead invested in its destruction.

That is my two cents before a more scholarly post.

Regards,

Bulgaroctonus.

[Bulgaroctonus]

[QUOTE=Ray;352181]

Those who follow the Apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures), - in the Law and the Gospel . . . so believe in God and his Apostle, the unlettered Prophet. Surah 7.157, 158.
I believe so.

Sir,

Thank you. That is a very important point, I stand corrected.

Regards,

Bulgaroctonus

[Ray]

Bulgar,

That is an interesting insight.

Very articulately and concisely said.

Lest I be misunderstood, I am not against Islam as a religion per se. What worries me is that its slow onslaught on my space.

I am merely trying to protect my space.

I am because I am.

[bandwagon]

Ultimately, I view most things within the human sphere as a conforming to social Darwinism. Islam is strong, and getting stronger, because it has proven itself more fit than other ideologies. It had destroyed or assimilated competing ideas, and many Muslim countries are reproducing at the fastest rates on Earth. The organism, or the ideology, that can propagate to the most successful extent will be the victor. This is how Christianity became strong, and it will become submissive to Islam if it does not remember that major religions, just like great civilizations, and inherently bound on coercion and atrocities.

It's not social Darwinism at all, but memetics. Social Darwinism, no matter how you view it, ultimately has a biological basis. It is the idea that some individuals or groups are inherently superior and predetermined to win out in the struggle. It does not apply to features like ideas or faith that are purely learnt.

Furthermore, it is not the religion itself that would make them strong, it merely modifies their behaviour. If Muslims want to dominate the world they will have to rely on characteristics other than religion, such as economic success, military strength. Again, unless they are born with these superior characteristics it cannot be said to conform to the rules of social Darwinism.

It is foolish to look within Islam for reform, much less negotiate with Muslims. That is usually a method of appeasement or denial, hiding from the truth that Islam is not interested in accommodation with the West, but is instead invested in its destruction.

There does however seem to be a difference between "Islam" and "Muslims". Your comments may apply to the idea of Islam. But Muslims as people behave differently. The vast majority do not recognise the idea that "Islam is not interested in accommodation with the West, but is instead invested in its destruction". They will bend over backwards to interpret the Quran to back up their peaceful path of existence.

The reason is obvious: human nature. The idea that you must constantly indulge in violence in the absence of cause is not natural for most humans. It requires a naturally motivating reason (threat, justice, revenge), - or: motivation through extreme indoctrination at a vulnerable time. Every child would have to go through it and even then many would still not come out baying for the blood of infidels. As a whole the population gives up on it. Until driven along by a new cause and a new Messiah.

[gunnut]

Timothy McVeigh was linked(more here) to Christian White Supremacists was he not? The other examples have been fundamentalists who've tried bombing abortion clinics.

That's a program by the BBC speculating on the conspiracy theory surrounding the bombing. It's not proof that he's a fundamental right wing christian extremist.

McVeigh was a seperatist. There are some seperatist who are also white supremists. There are some who are also christian extremists. But not all seperatists are christian extremists. He just didn't like the government. Lots of people don't like the government. He took it to the ultimate conclusion. He blew up the building as a sign of protest against the federal government rather than as a member of christian fundamentalist. There's a difference.

I'm NOT defending Islam or Muslims as perfect - however to try to paint Christian Fundamentalists as any better than Islamic Fundamentalists is wrong. The targets may be different, the end game may be different but a lot of the tactics are the same.

What do we do to christian fundamentalists if they step out of line? What do muslims do to islamic fundamentalists when they step out of line? That's the difference. We police our own. They don't police their own.

I'm not arguing that, you will see moderate Muslims equally saying that the Islamic Terrorists follow their own agenda and their own interpretation of Islam - a fundamentalist version.

They should do something about those people. Police their own. It won't be pretty when other people have to police their trash.

[Stan187]

I think, going back to what Ironduke said earlier in the thread, if European countries were to better integrate their Muslims, instead of making such conditions where they remain in poor and insular communities, it is well possible that they will adopt Western secularization.

I briefly discussed the English language al-Jazeera with Ra'anan Gisin (former chief political advisor to Ariel Sharon) last week, and he brought up an interesting point that I hadn't heard before. Which is that the English al-Jazeera was not only created to help appeal to Westerners, but also to Westernized Muslims in Europe, because a lot of them in the 2nd/3rd generations no longer speak the languages of their ancestors.

[Bulgaroctonus]

Eurabia 1

Members,

I don’t want to Islam take over Europe, but before I comment on that, I want to see what exactly is going on. This is the first of some facts I’ll supply to board before I launch on some tirade. Let’s see if Islam is actually poised to make Europe into ‘Eurabia’. Maybe its more complex, maybe not.

I have heard the demographics are destiny, so here we go.

Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission, said the following in a speech in Brussels, Belgium, on 5 December 2006. The title of the speech was The new social reality of Europe.

Demographic change is resulting in declining fertility and longer life expectancy. In 1950, 40% of EU citizens were under 25, by 2025 less than a quarter will be. In contrast, fewer than 1 in 10 were over 65 in 1950; nearly 1 in 4 will be in 2025.

EUROPA - Rapid - Press Releases

The above fact is often coupled with figures about high Muslim immigration rates, to create the fear the Europe will be demographically conquered by Islam to become a 'Eurabia'. I’m looking for more on Muslim population numbers, percentages, nationalities, and growth rates.

More posts to come.

Regards,

Bulgaroctonus

[Ray]

The question of integration is of course the key issue.

And the question is - will the Moslem integrate?

I would only leave one with the thought that owing to a sense of superiority, and the feeling that what one does is right, the question of integration becomes a moot point.

To substantiate this I can only draw on one of the posts in WAB on the integration of whites with black Republic of South Africa as an example:

the British descendants didn't seem to view themselves as African, they saw themselves as settlers from another land, even when they'd been born there.

Likewise, the Moslems who cling to their religious roots, of a religion that indeed feels it is the ONLY path to Heaven and that Harb ul Islam is the only mode for world peace, can they integrate?

I have seen Al Jazeerah on and oft. I, somehow, cannot reconcile to the idea that it is there to suitably 'temper' the westernised Moslem to a more pragmatic viewpoint. I see Al Jazeerah occasionally to observe the Arab viewpoint. I am not a Moslem, but the the footage and the commentary is so well presented that one sometimes wonder if the Americans or the West have got their act right and whether they are really keen on world peace. If that is what the impression one gets being a non Moslem and not connected directly with the events, then one wonders what it does to the ordinary Moslem.

I would also like to mention that quite a few Oriental races, having been under foreign subjugation for centuries, are very sensitive to rights and wrongs; sometimes over sensitive. Therefore, there is a tendency of Orientals to grudgingly accept whatever the West wishes that the world accept as the Gospel truth. It is only when irrefutable facts are presented, do they buy the 'party line'. Therefore, very few actually accept the rationale for Iraq in the Orient, even the most avid Western flag waver. In the light of such a mindset, what one sees on Al Jazeerah one does feel that what the West is stating, is not the truth and surely not the whole truth at all. If that is what non Moslem Oriental feel, then I leave it to you to wonder what the Oriental Moslem feels, let alone being educated or westernised. One doesn't have to go far. We have educated and westernised Moslems on the WAB. Their feelings are well known! So, with all humility, I will state that Al Jazeerah is not doing any good to change the mindset to appreciate the western viewpoint by the Moslem or even the non Moslem Oriental.

Notwithstanding, I hope I am wrong and the Chief Advisor to Sharon is right. Because, I, for one, am really interested in world peace, the only rider being equitable world peace!

[execrable]

Islam is strong, and getting stronger, because it has proven itself more fit than other ideologies. It had destroyed or assimilated competing ideas, and many Muslim countries are reproducing at the fastest rates on Earth. The organism, or the ideology, that can propagate to the most successful extent will be the victor. This is how Christianity became strong, and it will become submissive to Islam if it does not remember that major religions, just like great civilizations, and inherently bound on coercion and atrocities.

Are those same populations in Islamic countries reproducing at higher rates than others because

• modern medicine allows more children to survive now than previously?
• because there's an Islamic perogative to multiply and take over the world?

I think the former is the case, simply because those Moslems who move to the West (where lower / falling birthrates are seen) will take on Western lifestyles and live in western environments and possibly be exposed to the same causes of low / falling birthrates that weren't prevalent in their home countries.

I have read on this and other forums of the fear that Moslems will outbreed us all in the West and that they will take over - but I don't share that view / fear. Muslims are a small minority and their offspring are brought up more westernised and living a more western lifestyle than their parents.

[execrable]

The above fact is often coupled with figures about high Muslim immigration rates, to create the fear the Europe will be demographically conquered by Islam to become a 'Eurabia'. I’m looking for more on Muslim population numbers, percentages, nationalities, and growth rates.

For the UK, you should start here - the Government Statistics Office and the most recent Census.

Index Page for Government Statistics

Population Estimates based upon 2001 census

2001 figures for Religion

I am one of the 390,000 that put my religion down as "jedi" - OK, so I enjoy mischief sometimes...

Jedi the religion

[execrable]

Timothy McVeigh was linked to Christian White Supremacists

That's a program by the BBC speculating on the conspiracy theory surrounding the bombing. It's not proof that he's a fundamental right wing christian extremist.

OK, I don't know enough about him but I do still believe he had strong links to religous fundamentalist groups.

What do we do to christian fundamentalists if they step out of line? What do muslims do to islamic fundamentalists when they step out of line? That's the difference. We police our own.

They should do something about those people. Police their own.

Well............... If a Christian Fundamentalist in the UK or America does something illegal I expect the law enforcement to do something. I don't expect common citizens to take the law into their own hands.

I have elsewhere said I support the idea of "not in my name" protests where a group protests that the actions of a minority element does something that detracts from others. I have no problems with protests but taking other action is a recipe for disaster.

[subba]

Bulgaroctanus sir this is what i use with reference to Islam. It's got the hadith, Koran, and other texts. Good part is that it carries 3 versions.

USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts

It mayt be slightly sanitized..(there are sanitized versions available for non-muslims floating around). Though it's a good idea to try and follow the Koran in Arabic. But the Arabic in the Koran is significantly different from spoken arabic today. Some experts are of the opinion that around a 5th of it is incomprehensible. So i don't know if learning Arabic to read it will help much unless you're doing a very specific sholarship on exactly that.

[Ray]

[QUOTE]

Are those same populations in Islamic countries reproducing at higher rates than others because

• modern medicine allows more children to survive now than previously?
• because there's an Islamic perogative to multiply and take over the world?

I think the former is the case, simply because those Moslems who move to the West (where lower / falling birthrates are seen) will take on Western lifestyles and live in western environments and possibly be exposed to the same causes of low / falling birthrates that weren't prevalent in their home countries.

Falling birthrates is a global phenomenon and not in the West per se.

I would not be able to comment on Islamic countries, but even there, I believe, there is a great emphasis on Family Planning (i.e. having a planned family).

Therefore, whether they are in the West or in the East, the situation should be similar.

In fact, in the West, with better pay and facilities (NHS) they would be able to bring up a bigger family. Having large nuclear families is a cultural thing and not a phenomenon of residence.

I have read on this and other forums of the fear that Moslems will outbreed us all in the West and that they will take over - but I don't share that view / fear. Muslims are a small minority and their offspring are brought up more westernised and living a more western lifestyle than their parents.

If the Moslems were affected by the western lifestyle and thinking, then second generation British Moslems should have recoiled from the idea of bombing trains in London since it is just not a 'done thing'. Knifing and all that is game, but good Lord, not bombing of trains, by any chance!

The parents, who have come from foreign lands to seek a better future are aware of the blessings of such a move and are more law abiding than their western born children!