It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should Islam undergo a Reformation?

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 03:45 AM
link   
We are all aware that within any group, it is the people who hold extremist views and are willing to act violently on these views when they are criticised for having these views that are the key problem in the world. There are people in every type of group who either do believe they have a right to do these things unchallenged or will say they don't but contradict this with their actions. So why are people of late claiming that there might be an issue within Islam itself and not just extremism within Islam? Why isn't this standard applied to other religions or groups of people? I believe I have figured out why this is the case.

To answer this question, we must first look at population figures of Muslims compared with population figures of non-Muslim groups that can be comparable in some key way. It is currently estimated that there are about 1.6 billion adherents of Islam at present (about 22.30% of the global estimated population of 7.1 billion).

Of these, it is generally estimated that there are between (a lowest prediction of) 1% and (a highest prediction of) 25% considered to hold extremist views and are far more likely to act violently to support these views than refrain from doing so. Now obviously that is a HUGE percentage difference and we need to make a set percentage that seems fair. If we are to be completely consistent, we should make the percentage figure (1+25) divided by 2 to get an average. This would be 13%.

To demonstrate that I am not going to be bias, let us go further and drop that percentage to 10% (even though it would be more logical to go to 15% because we know numbers ending in 5 or 10 are the easiest to deal with in this sense.) But no, I will go with 10% because I want to overtly demonstrate that I am not being bias against Islam. So I am willing to change the number of extremist Muslims from the more logically closer 15% (about 240 million) to the less bias 10% (about 160 million). That is small change in percentage (3%) but a big change in the number of people we are talking about (80 million).

So let's be clear: I am willing to allow for such a drop just so I can convince others that I am not bias against Islam. I am going beyond what is expected of somebody who is looking at an issue relatively objectively. I am not a Muslim, never have been one and have always lived in Western countries. Therefore, this fixes to a reasonable degree any bias against Islam that would exist if I had not done this.

So I believe 10% (160 million Muslims) is a fair figure to arrive at. If we are going to be realistic, we will see that 160 million people cannot harm 7.1 billion people, even if they are the most heinous of people, especially not unless most of them are in positions of power and influence to do so, which would make their views undeniably dangerous to every other human. This is not the case and it seems most Westerners, Muslims living in the West and all other Muslims agree. Well we can be almost certain most Westerners and Muslims outside the West can agree, but can we actually be certain that most Muslims living within the West agree? No, we cannot. The reason is that according to Islamic belief, lying is strongly frowned down upon. It is not seen as a quality that is good for Muslims to possess. In fact, the only clear context in which it is to be openly permitted is when lying to non-Muslims in a way that endorses or protects Islamic beliefs.

Ok, that raises a red flag that we should explore. We now need to differentiate between moderate Muslims who are willing to lie about the truth of their faith and those that are not willing to. Why? Because if we don't, those that are lying are far more likely to join those who aren't lying (Extremist Muslims) when they are forced to. Of course that is very difficult to do, but I think I have a way. Let us make a third category of Muslims — Moderate Muslims that lie about their faith. So, to clarify: we have 3 key groups of the global Muslim population — Extremists, Moderates who might be lying and Moderates who are probably not lying. Extremists we know are a problem, Moderates who might be lying might be a problem but we cannot confirm this even with evidence, and Moderates who are probably not lying are extremely unlikely to be a problem.

So how do we determine the percentages of each to get a good picture of what's going on. Let us start by dividing the population of Moderate Muslims into another category (Honest Moderate Muslims), those Moderate Muslims who are more likely to be lying and those less likely to be lying. There is a global Muslim population of 1.6 billion people. We determined earlier that the estimated number of extremists is 10% (160 million) which means to get the estimated number of overall Moderates, we need to subtract 160 million from 1.6 billion. Which means there are a total of about 1.44 billion Moderate Muslims worldwide.

Now to try and actually separate the liars from the honest. The best way to do this would be to compare the percentage of the worldwide population that are likely to be liars, or who are able to lie to such a degree that they are dangerous just for the sake of being liars. We know every single person on this planet lies at some stage. We don't know what percentage lies in a way that becomes dangerous to the lives of others though, that would be impossible to determine because we don't know their exact circumstances.

Since we cannot determine that, let us go with a figure that is not backed by evidence, but rather arrived at with reason. I would say about 30% of the people on this planet intentionally lie (or are unaware they are lying) in a way that becomes dangerous to the lives of others. (30% of 7.1 billion). Now this is obviously a massive issue worldwide and not just within Islam. The vast majority of countries worldwide, regardless of religion seem to discourage lying intentionally and doing so is viewed unfavourably in a social context if it is discovered a lie has been told.

By using the above logic (which I admit is not ironclad, but still seems reasonable), we could apply this 30% figure to the Moderate Islamic world. Before we do, I will demonstrate once again that I have no intention of being bias against Muslims. Therefore I will lower the percentage total to 20% when I apply to the Moderate Muslim world. Even if my original 30% assumption for the global dangerous lying rate were ridiculously far from the truth (which actually cannot be determined and therefore must be estimated using reason) it wouldn't really matter in this context because the topic we are currently concerned with is dangerous lying by Muslims within the Western world. Added to that is the earlier mentioned fact that dangerous lying is permitted if Islam is to benefit from this lie, as long as the liar is Muslim and the person being told the lie is not Muslim.

[Continued]


edit on 6/4/2017 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 03:46 AM
link   
So let us do some more math. 20% (the number of Muslims within the Moderate Muslim population who lie dangerously) of 1.44 billion (total Moderate Muslim population before a division has been made) is 288 million. Our earlier estimation showed that the number of Muslim extremists was 160 million. Now we will be lumping together Muslim extremists with Muslim Moderates who lie dangerously. This might initially seem ridiculous to do, but here is why it is not. If the current Muslim population inside Western countries stayed the same, there would be no reason to even consider this. Since overall growth suggests Muslims are continually coming into Western countries (even if the rate changes dramatically over time), it means that if the population of Muslims inside Western countries became so high that there is a challenge to Western laws to accommodate this change, those who are lying Muslim Moderates are far more likely to side with extremist Muslims rather than non-Muslims because even though their approaches might be different, their religious beliefs are still shared to a strong degree. If not, why would they maintain their Muslim faith if living in a country where many of their beliefs clash with the host country's values?

So let us do this: 288 million (total number of Moderate Muslims that lie dangerously) and 160 million (Extremist Muslims) = 448 million people. So 448m (dangerous Muslims) out of 7.1b (global human population) still does not seem problematic, but not every country in the world shares Western values. Therefore, only people who live in Western countries can be counted as having Western values. I cannot find a source that can estimate the worldwide population of countries that represent the Western world, but I am confident that the largest reasonable estimate would be less than 500m.

The USA, the most populous Western country has about 320m and that itself is an extreme outlier compared to most Western countries which have nowhere near such a large population. But let us overestimate again to demonstrate that we are not being biased against Islam. Let's assume that the estimated population of Western countries is 500m,which may contain dangerous people that can harm Western nations themselves, but it is very unlikely to be done so due to any religious beliefs, which is the discussion of this topic.

There are 448m people living on this planet (some of which are currently living within Western countries already) who prioritise their religious beliefs over their loyalty to the country in which they live, when the country in which they live does not have a Muslim majority population. These 448 million people will destroy the Western world if given the opportunity to do so. Since the total population of the Western world is about 500m, the numbers are extremely concerning, but we are not quite at panic stage yet.

Conclusions

Only about 448m out of 1.6b total Muslims (28%) are a serious danger to non-Muslims. Therefore it can be definitively ruled out that there is an inherent problem with the Islamic faith that is beyond repair.

However, there still remain some serious concerns that need to be discussed immediately and resolved soon before these issues reach a point that they cannot be rectified.

The first problem is that this thread does not take into account non-Muslims who apologise and defend Muslims (pretending they are one people) whenever criticism of specific Muslim groups is addressed, probably on the grounds of not wanting to be seen as Islamophobic or wanting to be seen to be doing the right thing by supporting a minority within their country. I estimate this number would be staggeringly high, but since it is extremely difficult to even arrive at a reasonable assumption, I will not do so. I just thought I would mention an important (but not vital) variable that would alter the severity of the problems already found in this thread.

The chief concern I draw from this thread is that if a Muslim population within a predominantly non-Muslim nation reaches a population that becomes significant in power (then lying Moderates and Extremists together pose a grave danger to the country) whereas if a Muslim population within a predominately non-Muslim nation reaches a population that becomes significant in raw numbers, extremists pose a threat, but not as big a threat as the former.

The reality is this: if Muslims want the freedom to migrate into Western countries without restriction, Islam will need to undergo a reformation of some kind. If Muslims agree that discrimination against them in this capacity is fair considering the current state of circumstances, then there is no need for a reformation of the religion. I personally believe a reformation is a good idea either way because not only will it remove beliefs in Islam that are inherently dangerous if believed literally, but it will show the world that, like other major religions, Islam CAN adapt well to modernity and is not afraid to admit and correct problems within its faith. But the decision is firmly within the hands of Muslims, not non-Muslims.

If you reached the end, thank you very much for reading. It took a while to make this thread and I do hope at least some members can take something away from it and perhaps view the issue through a fresh perspective.

edit on 6/4/2017 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 03:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

Hahahahaha!

erm...well...like....yeah!

We all should though.

We need a human reformation on a universal level. It is not just Islam. Islam is one cause and one response. It is not possible as it stands as most of us are not yet evolved enough, both in Islam and the rest of the world.

The day will surely come though. We shall end up as we began...one people. I've been to the mountaintop,

"And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!"
(MLK)



Keep up the good work. Amigo!



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

Did ya know that when I hear MLK's voice I get goose bumps? I can't think of another human being who has that effect. His voice actually physically affects me.

They don't make em like that any more, do they!



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

Interesting thread. I personally don't think Islam will change its doctrine though, since its purpose is in fact to undermine and take over other societies. But I have to agree that your idea is the path that needs to be taken so that all can get along without worry.

The extremist are a concern but to my way of thinking the moderates are the most dangerous to a society. Killing in the name of any religion is just archaic and should have stopped centuries ago. We are supposed to be living in a "civilized" world. The passive societal takeover is what I see as the real threat. When elements of Sharia law start to infect our own legal system then we are in trouble.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 04:13 AM
link   
As Karl Marx once said.

religion is the opiate of the masses

All religions should be scrapped. They are just a bunch of manipulative tools to fool and control the masses. Having said that, I don't think humanity is able to survive without manipulation to a large extent. Either by religion or other means.

Omg, we are doomed



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: alexpmi

I hate Karl Marx, but I share the hate towards religion, especially the Abrahamic ones. The only purpose of religion is to divide and conquer. It is really sad that people are still buying into this # and severing their relationships to their friends because they have different opinions on religion and politics. The elite plan is working like a charm.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: KingofSting

In no way whatsoever I endorse Marx opinions, but this frase in particular I consider as pretty spot on



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: KingofSting
a reply to: alexpmi

I hate Karl Marx, but I share the hate towards religion, especially the Abrahamic ones. The only purpose of religion is to divide and conquer. It is really sad that people are still buying into this # and severing their relationships to their friends because they have different opinions on religion and politics. The elite plan is working like a charm.


If religion did not exist at all we would still have the same level of unnecessary evil, wars, murders, and insanity. Religion is just a conversation. Human nature is the problem.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

RE: "Our earlier estimation showed that the number of Muslim extremists was 160 million."

In 2015 the US dropped 23,000 bombs on five predominately Muslim countries. In 2016 the US dropped 28,000 bombs on the same predominately Muslim countries. I have this theory that the reason why they hate us has nothing to do with the amount of sex we have on TV. I think they hate us because we bomb the effing Shiite out of them! When you carpet bomb countries you invariably end up killing lots of innocent woman and children. You destroy the infrastructure people need to provide a quality of life for their families. When you reduce cities to rubble you are bound to create a few radicals along the way.

I would argue with the 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and that we bomb the effing Shiite out of them that Islam really is a religion of piece. You would think a whole heck of lot more of them would be radicalized. If Russia or China came to the United States and bombed the red-neck out of North Carolina or Georgia I guarantee you we would have red-neck extremists strapping on suicide bombs like we did during the civil war.

I think people need to step back and give the Muslims a little more credit. At some point we have to stop killing the ragheads for Israel. The US has dropped over 50,000 bombs in the last two years. I'm sorry, it's really hard to call the Muslims extremists when the US is carrying out a carpet bombing raghead policy.



edit on 6-4-2017 by dfnj2015 because: typo



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

They're the same as any cumbersome institution and will have to reform or die out. Takes generations though and won't be seen in our lifetimes. Of course, you also have to factor in diversity amongst Muslims too.

Yes, there are 'Muslim apologists' who seem incapable of criticising some key beliefs under Islam. At the same time, there are people who are incapable of conceiving how 80 years of bombings and interference can create a teensy weensy bit of animosity.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

That's a fair point.

Ironically, I think that is precisely what drives most of the apologists: because the West has bombed Muslim countries for 80 years, we should just ignore any criticism of Islam because we have no moral authority to criticise anyone.

Well, the world does not function on morality alone. If it did, we would be living in the Stone Age perpetually and would never progress beyond that point. We would never be in a position to combat natural disasters, mutations in disease or accumulate resources because they would run out too quickly trying to ensure everyone everywhere had the same number of resources.

How about a compromise? The West stops bombing Muslim countries completely, and Radical Muslims stop attacking Western countries.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:34 AM
link   
You'll get a star for your work, you did some work now. But nah.



The reality is this: if Muslims want the freedom to migrate into Western countries without restriction, Islam will need to undergo a reformation of some kind.


Islam has been in this country for quite some time. It's become a problem since the word got dropped it has boat loads of oil. The religion is used a proxy, it's an excuse by those are fighting geopolitical opponents.

There are a group of people that lived through real terror by terrorists, right here in America. Terrorists that have killed people recently. They used the cover of religion as an excuse for their actions too. However, that religion is not demonized by the actions of that group. Islam should be judged in the same light.

If every Muslim was hell bent on the destruction of Western Powers then your musings would be correct. But they aren't. Like I said, nah, at least not what I think.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: cenpuppie

I don't mean this as an insult, but did you read the entire opening post? It seems close to impossible that you did because you would know my conclusion at the end, after all the work I put in, states clearly that there is no inherent problem with the Islamic faith. There is no inherent problem with the Islamic faith. In that same conclusion I stated that approximately 28% of the entire Muslim population on this planet is a grave threat to the West. This is after making concessions on at least 2 occasions to purposely show bias in favour to Islam.

If somebody reads my thread in full, waited 5 minutes, then read the last paragraph of your reply, they would think you are replying to a different thread and must have posted by mistake.


edit on 6/4/2017 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
In that same conclusion I stated that approximately 28% of the entire Muslim population on this planet is a grave threat to the West.


This is NOT a fact but an opinion.

I think the problem with Muslims is not the religion but too many people being radicalized because they are living in poverty. And they are living in poverty as a direct result of US bombings. The US dropped 28,000 bombs on five predominately Muslim countries in 2016. What is the purpose of the policy?



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Muslims have been killing other muslims since time began and will continue to do so as long as they have breath in their bodies. They aren't going to stop fighting amongst each other just because the west goes wading in, and they also won't stop if we don't go wading in.

Just leave them to sort their differences between themselves. They'll either learn to live together or wipe each other out.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

I believe they should just quit while they have a head.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
In that same conclusion I stated that approximately 28% of the entire Muslim population on this planet is a grave threat to the West.


This is NOT a fact but an opinion.

I think the problem with Muslims is not the religion but too many people being radicalized because they are living in poverty. And they are living in poverty as a direct result of US bombings. The US dropped 28,000 bombs on five predominately Muslim countries in 2016. What is the purpose of the policy?



Radicalisation caused by the religion itself......

The Old Testament wasn't much chop either....

Everything has been modified so much, what are we to believe.

This is why i am non-religious.

And if *HE/SHE is all forgiving , then when i arrive at the pearly gates, all is good.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost


Put a few nukes in the hands of some of various terrorist groups and then let's see what kind of Hell they can produce for the rest of us. Oh, wait! It's sorta happening as we speak!

If you reflect on some of the infamous regimes over the last hundred years, you can see how a few "hot heads" can raise their masses to intolerable almost or even uncontrollable heights. Allowed to grow and fester within their own midst is the problem as outsiders can't do or say much in these days until that horror over-reaches its boundaries. Only then are those on the outside ethically able to resist. To not see nations of those sorts being a threat even now is blind faith in some obscure feature of humanity that rarely is on display in the world and not one that will survive when the swords and black flags come waving.



posted on Apr, 6 2017 @ 07:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: doobydoll
Muslims have been killing other muslims since time began and will continue to do so as long as they have breath in their bodies. They aren't going to stop fighting amongst each other just because the west goes wading in, and they also won't stop if we don't go wading in.

Just leave them to sort their differences between themselves. They'll either learn to live together or wipe each other out.



Killing people has nothing to do with being Muslim. If religion did not exist at all there will still be just as many acts of unnecessary evil, wars, and murder. The problem is people living in poverty and human nature. I have this theory that there would be peace in the ME if Arabs has more access to good Jewish dentists.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join