I agree...it's not a religion

Submitted by donevan (United States), Nov 27, 2014 at 14:40

I am in agreement that the conflicts we see from numerous places are not about Religion; they are about I'slam. I'slam does not comport with "Religion" as I and others understand the term. While there are prayers, customs, and dogma, "Religion" to my mind is a "Re-linking" to the deity, whatever that may be. In I'slam the notion is to "Submit" to the diety. In my discussions with adherents to I'slam, an encounter with "The god" is not to be wished. Hence the 'communion', or desire to become one with the deity is truncated, therefore no "Re-linking" is possible. Other belief systems may be similar, but all pre-date Christianity. I'slam is unique in that the term is no reflection of the deity, and is an imperative ie "You MUST submit" The term 'submission' is so ambiguous as to be meaningless. Submit to whom, for what purpose, if the belief is predestination, submission is a foregone conclusion. Only when viewed as a political rational does the dogma make sense, that is submission to the political which is only seeking a predestined outcome.......

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".