Islamism

Well, here I disagree because the terms are too general. The Quran states certain things to be true. Men then interpret those words to fit a specifc political agenda. For that reason I am an advocate of the concept of "seperation of church and state" accordingly that concept adheres to my philosophy that religion (is up to the individual) and cannot be attached to all US citizens. IMO, this is where confusion sets in.

(somewhat off point, but I feel necessary to express) From a historical persepctive, when speaking of America, we must include religious doctrine because it is woven into our history. Not to do so, is ignorance, not right not wrong, just ignorance.

Some clerics teach the extremes of Islam, not all.

Here I disagree as well. I would propose the opposite is true. Most religions advocate the same things Islam does. The essence of the messages to me, are the same. It is the human interpreter who causes the rifts between people. I would advocate some leaders use religion for control and power.

Perhaps extreme islam is more prevelant today, regarding governments controlled by religion. And for other looks at extremism in religion we need only to consult history.

the Quran is only interpreted by imams.
general men don't interpret anything in islam.
do you get that?

No. I think I find sectionOne agrees with me that the Islamic religion is deeply rooted in violence against other faiths.

Not Muslims as individuals, just the basics of the religion, the Qu'ran and other such things. Many, even the majority of Muslims are not violent in conversion techniques.

If the Imams are the only ones who interpret the Q'uran how can we be sure of the translated versions? If this has always happened how can we be sure that the Q'uran just as the Bible was not compounded by early Imam's to fit their agenda and it built on that? I agree that now muslims are greatly influenced to violence, many give in, others embrace it, but we must be very careful to support those who renounce violence, because they are our only chance of a peaceful inter-religious resolution.

If the Imams are the only ones who interpret the Q'uran how can we be sure of the translated versions? If this has always happened how can we be sure that the Q'uran just as the Bible was not compounded by early Imam's to fit their agenda and it built on that? I agree that now muslims are greatly influenced to violence, many give in, others embrace it, but we must be very careful to support those who renounce violence, because they are our only chance of a peaceful inter-religious resolution.

If the Imams are the only ones who interpret the Q'uran how can we be sure of the translated versions? If this has always happened how can we be sure that the Q'uran just as the Bible was not compounded by early Imam's to fit their agenda and it built on that? I agree that now muslims are greatly influenced to violence, many give in, others embrace it, but we must be very careful to support those who renounce violence, because they are our only chance of a peaceful inter-religious resolution.

At the time it was writen that was most likly what it was like for them. All non-muslims at the time were enemies to attack or defend against. It is in keeping those traditions alive that result in violence. Anyway I would expect that if the early Imams did have influence enough to manipulate the Q'uran they would be inteligent enough to insert passages speaking about it's infallibility.

At the time it was writen that was most likly what it was like for them. All non-muslims at the time were enemies to attack or defend against. It is in keeping those traditions alive that result in violence. Anyway I would expect that if the early Imams did have influence enough to manipulate the Q'uran they would be inteligent enough to insert passages speaking about it's infallibility.

"The Bible was formulated to fit the agendas of the elite at the time."

What? Who taught you that -- some commie prof? The canonical standard for NT document acceptance centered on quality, contribution to a comprehensive Christian viewpoint, and maintenance of the story-line of Jesus' Davidic descendancy. Any document that didn't meet that standard was excluded.

The Bible was formulated to fit the agendas of the elite at the time. The Imams could have and most likely manipulated the texts in the same way. It is means of control. Believe what you want, you may have been socially conditioned to not question things but its all good..I had to take a course at Brandeis University on Aremeic. I have read the Arameic texts for myself and it is vastly different. Its very interesting to see first hand how things have been mistranslated and manipulated. Everybody is aware of Reggie White and how he was deeply religious. He was taking courses on Arameic and reading the texts. He lost his faith towards the end of his life because he realized that the Bible he worshipped was not the texts that were written.