Islamic ' Extremists' burn down yet another church over allged blashempy.

In the 21 century, yes, but not within history.

 

Well we have to live in THis Century.. and Christianity gave up Holy Wars 500 years ago.

 

Some, yes, others, no.

 

From a Muslim point of view, since they were living peacefully in their lands, it was totally unjustified. Even in Christianity, it had more to do with the problems of the pope than 'saving' the lands from the Muslims - that was just an excuse. If you think that the Crusades were a justified removal of Muslims from 'Christian' lands, you need to do a little more research about them.

The 'large amount' isn't really that huge, but they are going not because of their own situation, but because of the way they see their 'brothers' (possibly quite literally - many will have family members still living in Muslim countries) being treated and attacked, and the attitude they see in foreign policy towards Islam and islamic countries in general from certain Western states in particular. The mistrust and fear that is behind some of the foreign policy breeds a negative reaction of resistance, and resistance gains support.

The Qur'an has some passages which can certainly be read as violent if they are not viewed within the context of the peaceful message of the work as a whole and the time in which those passages were written. So does the Bible.

 

That is probably not how it appears to some Muslims!

 

Iraq and Afhganistan were not religously motivated,

Thailand Phillipines Sudan Nigeria Ethiopia Russia and other islamo facist conflicts all are, for infidels are worthless and a obstacle for islam.

 

I disagree. A society cannot change history. However, we can indeed learn from history and try to bring about change in the present. Excusing the extreme interpretations of Islam on the basis of something that occured 500 years ago will not bring about that change.

What does make a religion inherently violent then, if not the teachings of that religion? One of the fundamental dogmas of Islam is jihad. Certain moderate Muslims who are in the minority define jihad as a spiritual struggle, but the vast majority of Muslims in the Middle East define it as Mohammed defined it 1300 years ago: as war against the infidel.

 

Perhaps people in the west believe that, but some Muslims certainly seem to be quite suspicious of some of the underlying motives - given the history of the behaviour of western countries in the middle east, you can hardly blame them!

 

Yet that cannot be said about suspiciou to muslims? after Muhammed died they have done nothing but causing micchief and mayhem.

 

Since history generally details people who have long been dead, I don't see its relevance in a discussion about people who, living today, use their religion to promote violence in the world.

 

Of course it is relevant. Without understanding what has happened in the past, you cannot possibly even begin to understand the present context and events in anything like a meaningful way.

 

Say DutchClogCyborg, I'd really appreciate it if you could respond to my post, it's number 49 and I think you'll find it informative.

 

Well, from my brief and cursory understanding of history, the United States was not in any way involved in the Crusades. OBL missed the Tower of London by- what? - some two thousand miles?

 

Your ancesters were, just as much as the ancestors of the people in any 'western' country were.

 

Where di they burn another church?
This is near daily.

Egypt?
Nigeria?