Islam could become Europe’s dominant religion

[IbnAbdulHakim]

jazakAllah khair bro Osman for putting this wide smile on my face.

may Allah make islam victorious (and it is guaranteed)

 

[England]

I worked with an Iraqi not so long ago. I asked him if he was muslim and he said yes, a kurd. I said "how come you don't pray 5 times a day?" He told me that he was only muslim by name. He didn't practice it. He was always flirting with the girls. I was a bit surprised though as I thought Iraqis would be REALLY religious.

Remember that "muslim" guy that exchanged numbers with me? He told me he prayed 5 times a day and drinks "little" alcohol. When I saw him glare at a girl that walked past I smirked and asked him "isn't that wrong?" He laughed and said he doesn't follow that part as it is hard to follow.

What would be the point in praying to God when, according to his faith, he would be disobeying Him?

I've got no problems with what he did, I understand his point but I'm you sure you lot won't.

There are "muslims" that call themselves "muslims" by name.

 

[Zulkiflim]

I worked with an Iraqi not so long ago. I asked him if he was muslim and he said yes, a kurd. I said "how come you don't pray 5 times a day?" He told me that he was only muslim by name. He didn't practice it. He was always flirting with the girls. I was a bit surprised though as I thought Iraqis would be REALLY religious.

Remember that "muslim" guy that exchanged numbers with me? He told me he prayed 5 times a day and drinks "little" alcohol. When I saw him glare at a girl that walked past I smirked and asked him "isn't that wrong?" He laughed and said he doesn't follow that part as it is hard to follow.

What would be the point in praying to God when, according to his faith, he would be disobeying Him?

I've got no problems with what he did, I understand his point but I'm you sure you lot won't.

There are "muslims" that call themselves "muslims" by name.

Salaam,

They refer themselves as muslim but do UnIslamic things.

They are doing deviant acts but not those that will make them cast out of Islam.

eg like idolatry or worshipping man as god.

Inshallah Allah knows best.

Did you know that even the NOI memebr refer to themselves as Muslim,but follow a man god...they are DEFINETLY NOT MUSLIM>..

 

[Pygoscelis]

I don’t think the problem is to worry about numbers and who is going to be the dominant force in Europe, numbers always seem to shift and change.

The greater challenge is how can we strive for a greater friendship with people who are different to us? How can we get on and still celebrate our differences?

In the spirit of praying for a greater secular and interfaith friendship

I do believe that numbers matter. The big conflict to come is fundamentalist muslims/christians (they too breed quickly) vs liberalism and secularization.

They are diametrically opposed and there is no reconcilation. The former wants to dominate (enact laws according to their faiths) and convert all others. The latter wants separation of curch and state. The religionists have the advantage because they seek to whipe out secularism (save souls, enact holy law, etc) whereas the secularists are not nearly as motivated to destroy religion.

 

[Keltoi]

I do believe that numbers matter. The big conflict to come is fundamentalist muslims/christians (they too breed quickly) vs liberalism and secularization.

They are diametrically opposed and there is no reconcilation. The former wants to dominate (enact laws according to their faiths) and convert all others. The latter wants separation of curch and state. The religionists have the advantage because they seek to whipe out secularism (save souls, enact holy law, etc) whereas the secularists are not nearly as motivated to destroy religion.

Traditionally the conflict between religious peoples and the liberal and secular nature of the government hasn't been a big issue. Yes, many Christians feel that their faith is being attacked by organizations like the ACLU, but that is not the same thing as attempting to impose a theocracy, which few mainstream Christians would support. The "neo-secularists" have begun to attack any expression of Christian belief in the public arena. That was not the intention of the founding fathers.

 

[ManchesterFolk]

I happen to disagree.I don't think Islam will be practised at all in the next decade in this increasingly liberal world.read about Jews no longer carrying out their religious duties and have seen plenty of Muslims not practise their religion.Its liberalism ,not western culture.

lol, don't tell me that about those Jews. Where I live around 1,000 ultra-orthodox Jews moved in and set up a place of prayer and religious school. They have such high birth rates (each jewish family has at least 8 kids majority have over 10) that there population triples every 10 years and now they are huge and expanding. I might have to move if they continue this way becvause my neighborhood in about 30 years is predicted to go from secular majority to orthodox jewish majoirty and i dont want to live in an area like that.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Traditionally the conflict between religious peoples and the liberal and secular nature of the government hasn't been a big issue. Yes, many Christians feel that their faith is being attacked by organizations like the ACLU, but that is not the same thing as attempting to impose a theocracy, which few mainstream Christians would support. The "neo-secularists" have begun to attack any expression of Christian belief in the public arena. That was not the intention of the founding fathers.

I agree that separation of church and state should be double edged. The state should not interfere in affairs of the church any more than the church should interfere in affairs of the state.

So long as the relgious don't push their religion upon the rest of us, enacting laws, endangering lives, changing public school programming to fit an agenda (private religious schools i have no problem with), etc, I think they should be left alone to worship as they see fit.

I think that you and I actually meet very close to the same position on this issue, just coming at it form opposite sides. So naturally we'll notice the violations from the opposite of extreme of our repective selves, extremes to which neither of us belong.

 

[Bittersteel]

ol, don't tell me that about those Jews. Where I live around 1,000 ultra-orthodox Jews moved in and set up a place of prayer and religious school. They have such high birth rates (each jewish family has at least 8 kids majority have over 10) that there population triples every 10 years and now they are huge and expanding. I might have to move if they continue this way becvause my neighborhood in about 30 years is predicted to go from secular majority to orthodox jewish majoirty and i dont want to live in an area like that.

I should have added the word some.My point was it aren't Muslims only who are finding it difficult to adjust with modern secularism and liberalism.BTW,Manchester isn't that anti-semitism?

 

[Uthman]

Hi,

I'm not sure if we can both agree that the secularization of Christianity was a good thing? A few hundred years ago Christians were burning witches, killing heretics, warring with anybody from a different worldview (including muslims). People would blindly follow whatever church leaders told them.

I don't know much about Christianity. Does it actually condone these acts?

Its liberalism ,not western culture.

Well, I think they pretty much equate to the same thing.

 

[KAding]

I happen to disagree.I don't think Islam will be practised at all in the next decade in this increasingly liberal world.read about Jews no longer carrying out their religious duties and have seen plenty of Muslims not practise their religion.Its liberalism ,not western culture.

Or it is even more fundamental, it is modernity. The emancipation and education of the masses, which has led to the empowerment of the individual. I find it very interesting that all countries that have developed economically in Asia have become so much like the West (read materialist and liberal).

Which makes me think it is indeed nothing inherent to 'the West', but rather a consequence of modernizing. Modern economic lifestyles lead to liberalism by definition, slowly killing traditional culture. Nothing new, because lets be honest here, how much of traditional Western culture is part of what we now call 'Western culture'? Not much IMHO.

 

[Keltoi]

Or it is even more fundamental, it is modernity. The emancipation and education of the masses, which has led to the empowerment of the individual. I find it very interesting that all countries that have developed economically in Asia have become so much like the West (read materialist and liberal).

Which makes me think it is indeed nothing inherent to 'the West', but rather a consequence of modernizing. Modern economic lifestyles lead to liberalism by definition, slowly killing traditional culture. Nothing new, because lets be honest here, how much of traditional Western culture is part of what we now call 'Western culture'? Not much IMHO.

Well, "Western" culture does borrow alot from the Greeks and Romans, which is what I think of when I think of "Western" culture. However, you are correct in that modernity has made that less apparent.

 

[Uthman]

Greetings and peace be with you brother Osman,

And you brother Eric

I’m with Mr Gibson, its good to see you back again, I have missed your wit, wisdom and the ability to find a smilie for all occasions.:blind: :-[ :statisfie +o( :exhausted :raging: :skeleton: :thumbs_up

Haha! I've missed you too.

I don’t think the problem is to worry about numbers and who is going to be the dominant force in Europe, numbers always seem to shift and change.

The greater challenge is how can we strive for a greater friendship with people who are different to us? How can we get on and still celebrate our differences?

Wise words as always brother Eric.

I think it has come to a stage where it is rare that a person will find a true Muslim or a true Christian. The onus is on us to practise our religions to the best of our ability. We don't have the power to control the masses, and we don't need to.

 

[Darkseid]

I think the birthrates are legit if they are to decrease the population.

Too many children means more Chinas. More chinas means eventually we will be eating each other rather than competing with each other for food.

China is already having a close enough problem of their people starving, because it has too many people to feed.

We should take caution of their practice and not repeat the same mistake.

So I think we should limit birthrates rather than excelerate them. I do believe some countries should promote more population, but most should just limit it to help perserve their environment.

Less people being borned does not mean the end of the world. If less people were being borned in China then we would be having a much more splendid time world wide and if the same be implied to India as well. But I do agree that if less people were being borned in lets say San Marino, then that could mean a disaster for the state of San Marino.

Japan has a low birth rate, but it is in desperate need of one.


Now I'll explain where this low birth rate comes from and these low attendance at the churches.

Low birth rates come from women being allowed to focus on their jobs and their success. This comes from thier being too many people to take care of that concerns their job work (like being a doctor or lawyer). There should be nothing wrong with that. As when there are less people to take care of then the birth rate should increase. This is a natural cycle.

People are attending less church, because either they have less belief in those faiths or they have less belief in the churches that pertain to those faiths. Both of these are good for a certain perspective of thought, but create caution to those that support religious ideas. Churches have for a long time render individual thinking and ability to understand. They limit the freedom of expression and the freedom to become one with god by one's own means. This whole freedom account traces back to Martin Luther and when he seperated his faith from the Catholic Church. But in the present terms people just don't trust the church and believe their faith should be present solely in their homes. Faith is suppose to be a individual thing and not a socially controlling thing.

Now for the less belief in faith. This comes from experience and from knowledge. When you look back in history, what do you see as the main cause of war? Religion. Bin Laden right now is encouraging more European Christians to turn away from faith, by making faith violent and aggressive.

Violence and aggression involving faith always turns people away from faith.

 

[Khan-Ghalgha]

Muslims had very different expirience of applying Islam, golden age of Islamic Khalifat were the first centuries of it's existence(tho, Islamic Khalifat in it's strict sence existed for only about 30 years or so)

Muslims were most sophisticated and progressive when they were very religiuos, when they abandon Islam and put in merely on an individual level, muslims've become backward and regressive and weak as of now.

Europe on other hand had very different expirience with christianity, which quite the opposite, that's why when you relate to Islam and muslims having historically europen expirience as your background you can make some grave mistakes, muslims simply have different paradigm, it's a historical fact - fully embrace Islam = prosperity, progress; abandon Islam = backwardness, regress.

 

[samah12]

As a european and a Muslim I can say we seem to be heading toward Islam being the dominant organised religion. However, capitalism will remain the strongest 'faith' in europe.

 

[Khan-Ghalgha]

As a european and a Muslim I can say we seem to be heading toward Islam being the dominant organised religion. However, capitalism will remain the strongest 'faith' in europe.

Or differently put - consumer ideology, I think that the most accurate description of todays Europe's dominant ideology.

 

[samah12]

Nicely put and unfortunately this ideology is now creeping into the middle east.

 

[Darkseid]

Muslims had very different expirience of applying Islam, golden age of Islamic Khalifat were the first centuries of it's existence(tho, Islamic Khalifat in it's strict sence existed for only about 30 years or so)

Muslims were most sophisticated and progressive when they were very religiuos, when they abandon Islam and put in merely on an individual level, muslims've become backward and regressive and weak as of now.

Europe on other hand had very different expirience with christianity, which quite the opposite, that's why when you relate to Islam and muslims having historically europen expirience as your background you can make some grave mistakes, muslims simply have different paradigm, it's a historical fact - fully embrace Islam = prosperity, progress; abandon Islam = backwardness, regress.

I think it involves something more deep than that.

You have to understand the whole condition involving faith in the middle-east.

You see before Islam there was hardly any literacy nor learning. When Islam was introduced, it sprouted a huge impact by promoting learning on a crucial and huge scale. As they turn away from Islam, they began turning away from learning at same time. That was the drawback of turning away from Islam. Like the dark ages in which people turn away from Roman Culture and thus education became dark (that's why it was called the Dark Ages). In Europe, Christianity was hindering people from learning and when people turned away from it, they began to learn again. Now I'm not saying that christianity is diabolic, but the means in which was used was rather authoritarian.

To say turning away from Islam promote stupidity, would be incorrect. Turning away from a sophisticated society promotes stupidity, would be correct.

Nicely put and unfortunately this ideology is now creeping into the middle east.

Well some Islamic figures did turn against socialism. You either have socialism, feudalism or lordism, or capitalism.

Socialism is when the state controls (though maybe not entirely) the economy.

Lordism is when a lord controls the economy. This is very similar to socialism, except it would involve a monarchy.

Capitalism is when the business it self controls the economy.

 

[Khan-Ghalgha]

Yeah, that really is much deeper:rollseyes

 

[KAding]

Muslims had very different expirience of applying Islam, golden age of Islamic Khalifat were the first centuries of it's existence(tho, Islamic Khalifat in it's strict sence existed for only about 30 years or so)

Muslims were most sophisticated and progressive when they were very religiuos, when they abandon Islam and put in merely on an individual level, muslims've become backward and regressive and weak as of now.

Europe on other hand had very different expirience with christianity, which quite the opposite, that's why when you relate to Islam and muslims having historically europen expirience as your background you can make some grave mistakes, muslims simply have different paradigm, it's a historical fact - fully embrace Islam = prosperity, progress; abandon Islam = backwardness, regress.

That might be so a millennium ago, but nowadays we see no correlation between religiosity and 'prosperity' and 'progress'. The muslim countries which are still very religious, like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, do not seem more developed, nor do they have a higher literacy rate than those that are secular, like Turkey. In fact, the opposite seems more the case.

And obviously economic and political systems evolved since the time of the Caliphate. Modern economies are no longer agricultural and competing ideologies are no longer based on absolute rule and feudalism. Islam no longer has to compete against backward governmental systems such as despotic monarchies, but highly sophisticated republican, democratic and socialist systems.