Us vs. Them: The psychology of communication

rowdyhawk10 said:I suspect you might be mistaken. 🙂 You really should have watched the entire film to understand that it’s nothing more than blatant mainstream propaganda, where biased half-truths are intentionally amplified. I guess everything in it was just taken out of context—distorted and fundamentally false. 😢 My late father and mother didn't experience Islam quite the way the filmmakers seem to be forcing it upon all Muslims—not that I've seen anyone else pushing back against it. It seems obvious from the footage that the creators intend to manufacture a potent wave of anti-Islamic propaganda in the Netherlands, and throughout Europe as well. It feels almost identical to how Hitler's propagandists stirred up the German people against the Jews. I suppose it's a shame you don't see it that way.

I don't really see the filmmakers as independent thinkers so much as they appear to be quite devout Christians. Perhaps a possible reason for this is that Christianity is currently facing a profound crisis. History seems to be repeating itself; something remarkably similar occurred leading up to the Crusades during the Middle Ages.

I suppose I agree that the Quran, if twisted through a distorted lens, can serve as a dangerous weapon in the hands of fanatics. However, I find myself disagreeing with the assessment that the citations themselves are inherently malicious. Warfare has its own logic, governed by established principles of honor and chivalry. It seems to me that you might be viewing these "vicious passages" outside of their original context—which was precisely the intention of the authors of this propaganda pamphlet and hate generator: to package them in such a way. If there is a genuine desire for dialogue, I am willing to address your questions regarding these (or any other) verses of the Quran, in good faith, to demonstrate that they do not contain the malice that certain bad actors attempt to project onto them.

No, I don't think that holds up. If the director hadn't intended to take this specific angle, they would have likely included some nuance or offered an objective perspective—perhaps even a positive example to balance things out, wouldn't they? Instead, everything is framed in such a dark, one-sided light. Because the content feels so biased and skewed, I’d say the film is fundamentally aimed at Islam and Muslims as a whole. If the filmmaker truly wanted to be objective and focus solely on terrorism, they wouldn't go out of their way to cast such broad strokes against the entire religion. To my mind, the creator's message is quite clear, and you can see it plainly in the final moments of the film if you bother to watch it.

The most distasteful and manipulative part of this movie occurs halfway through, when they show an image of a mother holding a child with a bloody head, attempting to frame it as "THE FUTURE OF ISLAM IN THE NETHERLANDS" 😲 In reality, that image depicts a specific ritual practiced by certain Shia groups where children undergo bloodletting on the day of Ashura, marking the martyrdom of Hussein (and mind you, Shias make up less than 10 percent of the Muslim population). I should also mention, since that’s how the film kicks off—that it claims the 9/11 attacks at the World Trade Center were actually a false flag operation involving suicide bombings orchestrated by the US administration (much like the anthrax attacks) specifically to shift the blame onto Islam. Best,

rowdyhawk10 said:I suspect you might be mistaken. 🙂 You really should have watched the entire film to understand that it’s nothing more than blatant mainstream propaganda, where biased half-truths are intentionally amplified. I guess everything in it was just taken out of context—distorted and fundamentally false. 😢 My late father and mother didn't experience Islam quite the way the filmmakers seem to be forcing it upon all Muslims—not that I've seen anyone else pushing back against it. It seems obvious from the footage that the creators intend to manufacture a potent wave of anti-Islamic propaganda in the Netherlands, and throughout Europe as well. It feels almost identical to how Hitler's propagandists stirred up the German people against the Jews. I suppose it's a shame you don't see it that way.

I don't really see the filmmakers as independent thinkers so much as they appear to be quite devout Christians. Perhaps a possible reason for this is that Christianity is currently facing a profound crisis. History seems to be repeating itself; something remarkably similar occurred leading up to the Crusades during the Middle Ages.

I suppose I agree that the Quran, if twisted through a distorted lens, can serve as a dangerous weapon in the hands of fanatics. However, I find myself disagreeing with the assessment that the citations themselves are inherently malicious. Warfare has its own logic, governed by established principles of honor and chivalry. It seems to me that you might be viewing these "vicious passages" outside of their original context—which was precisely the intention of the authors of this propaganda pamphlet and hate generator: to package them in such a way. If there is a genuine desire for dialogue, I am willing to address your questions regarding these (or any other) verses of the Quran, in good faith, to demonstrate that they do not contain the malice that certain bad actors attempt to project onto them.

No, I don't think that holds up. If the director hadn't intended to take this specific angle, they would have likely included some nuance or offered an objective perspective—perhaps even a positive example to balance things out, wouldn't they? Instead, everything is framed in such a dark, one-sided light. Because the content feels so biased and skewed, I’d say the film is fundamentally aimed at Islam and Muslims as a whole. If the filmmaker truly wanted to be objective and focus solely on terrorism, they wouldn't go out of their way to cast such broad strokes against the entire religion. To my mind, the creator's message is quite clear, and you can see it plainly in the final moments of the film if you bother to watch it.

The most distasteful and manipulative part of this movie occurs halfway through, when they show an image of a mother holding a child with a bloody head, attempting to frame it as "THE FUTURE OF ISLAM IN THE NETHERLANDS" 😲 In reality, that image depicts a specific ritual practiced by certain Shia groups where children undergo bloodletting on the day of Ashura, marking the martyrdom of Hussein (and mind you, Shias make up less than 10 percent of the Muslim population). I should also mention, since that’s how the film kicks off—that it claims the 9/11 attacks at the World Trade Center were actually a false flag operation involving suicide bombings orchestrated by the US administration (much like the anthrax attacks) specifically to shift the blame onto Islam. Best,

rowdyhawk10 said:Kenneth Peterson5,
I followed that old thread regarding the two of you back in the day, and I came away with a pretty sour impression of Muhammad. The whole debate centered on whether he was being hypocritical; I became fully convinced that he was, and I felt for you because of the incredibly difficult situation you found yourself in. I am glad to see you've moved past all that. However, even though my opinion of him hasn't changed, I have to admit that Muhammad actually spoke the truth in the specific instance you just mentioned. Here is why I think he’s right: if someone trusts a friend solely based on the fact that they are Muslim, they probably don't have any real friends, nor are they acting as a true friend to anyone else. That might constitute an alliance or an association, but it certainly isn't friendship. True friendship—much like genuine love, for that matter—doesn't depend on what someone believes.

As for that thesis... it's flawed, mostly because I make a distinction between being a believer and being a member of a specific church. Personally, I view Christianity today primarily as an institutionalized delusion. You are far more likely to find true devotion to Jesus anywhere else than within various church denominations. To me, following Jesus means—and it has always meant this—speaking nothing but the truth, doing good, and avoiding evil. Those people making the film are only as Christian as the Muslims or the terrorists depicted in it who are decapitating poor souls. 😢 Best regards,

Kenneth Peterson5; said:Dear rowdyhawk10,
My ex-fiancé Muhammad—and everyone else I know who follows Islam has confirmed this too—once told me: "You can recognize a true Muslim by the fact that they have ten friends, at least seven of whom are Muslims, yet you shouldn't believe them even once."

From such a warped perception of reality, it follows that one shouldn't even trust your intentions for bringing this topic up, given that you claimed you don't see free thinkers in the film's authors, but rather Christians, instead of saying you don't see free thinkers but rather "Christians" (or quasi-Christians, or Christians who have strayed for certain reasons...).

I would ask you to explain where I am mistaken in presenting such a shaky thesis.

steeleagle2 said:I can certainly do that...😍

There. That’s as honest as it gets.

I don't have a single friend. And yes, don't believe me. I wish for all of you to embrace Islam, and my entire life is dedicated to that goal: promoting and presenting Islam.🥳

The only thing is, you can be absolutely certain that I will never harm you in any way. Not at all. Not mentally, not emotionally, not spiritually, let alone physically. You can only benefit from me. Nothing negative ever comes from my side in any context. The worst thing you could get from me is nothing at all. Whether you are my neighbor, a business partner, a teacher at a preschool, or an undercover cop.😍

What does having a friend even mean to you? Is it just sharing common interests?😲 I don't know what actually binds friends together. Do you even have friends? Imagine if one converted to Islam.😲 😁 Would you still be friends?

But I do have brothers. Several. And sisters for whom I would give my life. Do you even know what it means to love someone more than yourself? Has anyone ever had a friend like that? Kenneth Peterson5?🙄

Moderate Muslims have a duty to spread Islam, but exclusively through peaceful means—by simply living their lives. If you happen to like our way of life and fall in love with it, then naturally, we will want that same happiness for you. We have no right to suffocate you with Islam, nor to impose it through force or any other method.
A Muslim who hasn't brightened your day through their example hasn't yet built themselves into a true believer.

P.S. A translation of the holy Quran isn't enough to grasp the message of a translated verse. Interpretation is required. A translation is not an interpretation. The verses of the Quran are interpreted by God through chosen pioneers (who could be ordinary people reaching high spiritual stations). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration often fall into various traps. The extremists alluded to in the film have fallen into one of them.

P.S. 2 Now you may continue your philosophizing.😍

steeleagle2 said:I can certainly do that...😍

There. That’s as honest as it gets.

I don't have a single friend. And yes, don't believe me. I wish for all of you to embrace Islam, and my entire life is dedicated to that goal: promoting and presenting Islam.🥳

The only thing is, you can be absolutely certain that I will never harm you in any way. Not at all. Not mentally, not emotionally, not spiritually, let alone physically. You can only benefit from me. Nothing negative ever comes from my side in any context. The worst thing you could get from me is nothing at all. Whether you are my neighbor, a business partner, a teacher at a preschool, or an undercover cop.😍

What does having a friend even mean to you? Is it just sharing common interests?😲 I don't know what actually binds friends together. Do you even have friends? Imagine if one converted to Islam.😲 😁 Would you still be friends?

But I do have brothers. Several. And sisters for whom I would give my life. Do you even know what it means to love someone more than yourself? Has anyone ever had a friend like that? Kenneth Peterson5?🙄

Moderate Muslims have a duty to spread Islam, but exclusively through peaceful means—by simply living their lives. If you happen to like our way of life and fall in love with it, then naturally, we will want that same happiness for you. We have no right to suffocate you with Islam, nor to impose it through force or any other method.
A Muslim who hasn't brightened your day through their example hasn't yet built themselves into a true believer.

P.S. A translation of the holy Quran isn't enough to grasp the message of a translated verse. Interpretation is required. A translation is not an interpretation. The verses of the Quran are interpreted by God through chosen pioneers (who could be ordinary people reaching high spiritual stations). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration often fall into various traps. The extremists alluded to in the film have fallen into one of them.

P.S. 2 Now you may continue your philosophizing.😍

Edward Flores4; said:Fair question... are you looking for an answer, or is this just rhetorical?

Let me be clear right out of the gate: I have nothing against Islam or any other religion per se. However, since you clearly consider yourself a believer (and you come across as quite lucid and articulate), I have one question regarding the quote you provided above.

Does your religion mandate the spreading of the faith, or is that simply your own personal intention? In other words, does your faith impose specific requirements regarding expansionism?

steeleagle2 said:There is no imposition involved. Our duty is merely to inform humanity, and that’s the extent of it. I don't want us to drift off-topic, though; we are still discussing philosophy here. My point in posting was to demonstrate that coexistence with Muslims in Europe is perfectly normal.

P.S. That "boldano" phrasing you used seems a bit odd—maybe a typo? As for your question, it's both rhetorical and not. Because ever since I've been watching this forum...😍

steeleagle2 said:There is no imposition involved. Our duty is merely to inform humanity, and that’s the extent of it. I don't want us to drift off-topic, though; we are still discussing philosophy here. My point in posting was to demonstrate that coexistence with Muslims in Europe is perfectly normal.

P.S. That "boldano" phrasing you used seems a bit odd—maybe a typo? As for your question, it's both rhetorical and not. Because ever since I've been watching this forum...😍

steeleagle2 said:There is no imposition involved. Our duty is merely to inform humanity, and that’s the extent of it. I don't want us to drift off-topic, though; we are still discussing philosophy here. My point in posting was to demonstrate that coexistence with Muslims in Europe is perfectly normal.

P.S. That "boldano" phrasing you used seems a bit odd—maybe a typo? As for your question, it's both rhetorical and not. Because ever since I've been watching this forum...😍

We have a striking example in Pius Ncube,
who suggests that an armed uprising or even
a military intervention could be the way to topple Robert Mugabe's regime.

To me, this feels like it could turn into another Iraq—another case of "liberating" a nation from a dictator—
though fortunately, Zimbabwe doesn't have the oil reserves that Iraq does.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1208...mEditorialPage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pius_Ncube

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6562815.stm

we Christians, unlike those who don't believe,>
don't view our opponents as enemies...>

Given how deeply intertwined the Church can be with nationalism,
and how nationalism often fuels hooliganism and chaos,
I suspect the reality is actually the exact opposite of what he said.

DAVID,
P.S. A translation of the Bible isn't enough to understand the message of a specific verse. You need interpretation. A translation isn't an interpretation. God interprets the verses for chosen leaders. (These could even be ordinary people who have reached high spiritual levels). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration end up falling into various traps. Some of those traps include the extremists the film refers to.

Sandra Wilson68 said:I just caught up on this thread, watched the video, and read through all the posts carefully.

Honestly, I've been obsessed for years with this whole "us vs. them" phenomenon—how the world splits itself up by countries, ideologies, political parties, religions, and nations. It's the root of almost every major evil on Earth. You don't have to be a genius to see that these divisions are just a facade used by specific individuals hungry for global power, fame, and material wealth. The only philosophy that matters here is realizing TO. Once regular people finally grasp TO, the world might actually be saved. When ordinary people TO, it'll mean they've realized how pointless it is to argue over the value of any global ideology, politics, religion, or nation. They'll see that clinging to any of those labels is useless because it doesn't benefit humanity, nor does it serve God; it only serves those bloated global elites at the top of these divides. They view their followers as nothing more than a flock of sheep meant to be sheared and slaughtered.

Seriously, what's the point of the Bible, or spreading any religion to rule the world in the name of some higher power? Get real, people! It's just inviting the devil to your doorstep and nothing else. If you've joined a "philosophy" forum, show at least a little bit of philosophical depth—meaning, learn to distance yourself from all this nonsense and think for yourself, instead of acting manipulated and playing ”interpreter by trying to defend one side or another. Just look at what David says:

DAVID,
P.S. A translation of the Bible isn't enough to understand the message of a specific verse. You need interpretation. A translation isn't an interpretation. God interprets the verses for chosen leaders. (These could even be ordinary people who have reached high spiritual levels). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration end up falling into various traps. Some of those traps include the extremists the film refers to.

What kind of ”interpreters in high positions” are you talking about, David? Watch your mouth: “God interprets the verses for chosen leaders”. Which God? Where is this God, David? Show him to us or at least explain him. Explain how we're supposed to know which one God actually chose among the countless ”“interpreters in high positions” (of the Bible or other texts), since everyone interprets things their own way. It's obvious He didn't choose all of them, because if He had, they would all interpret things the exact same way, not differently. And I'm really curious if you and Shaun are among those ”chosen interpreters in high positions”, since I see you two interpreting religious texts and spreading faith online for years now?

Don't get mad at me and think I'm representing some global ideology, nation, or religion against any faith. This is my personal, philosophical conviction that applies equally to every group and division in the world. That said, when it comes to Islamic culture, I've studied it for a long time and appreciate its ethics and worldview quite a bit. I'd love to see the Western world adopt some of that culture and ethics, provided that part of it is stripped of all religious dogma.

Just a heads-up: don't assume that because of everything I've said, I'm an ”unbeliever”, or an atheist, or one of those people that religion needs to ”settle scores with”. I know God exists, and I know who and what He is, but I don't belong to any religion. The God I know doesn't want any divisions or religions in this world. Even if we assume the Bible and other texts are from God—that Jesus and Muhammad were..."interpreters" of God's thoughts—and yeah, you're right, those interpretations weren't meant for Christians or Muslims either, because back during their "interpretation" phase, neither group even existed. These "interpretations" were intended for all humanity as a study of good and evil, or just pure philosophy. The fact that people later split apart over these "interpretations"—leading to freezing tensions and wars—that isn't from God, it's from the devil. The whole "divide and conquer" mantra doesn't come from God; it comes from the devil. Anyone keeping that division alive today through organized religion isn't serving God—they're serving the devil. Specifically, they're serving the West. That’s the main playbook and strategy for the West today. Using that tactic, the West uses its ideology called "democracy" to take over the world step by step. First, they pit naive, divided nations and religions against each other, provoking them until they fight, go to war, and bleed each other dry. Then, they can just stroll into the territory as "saviors and judges" and take total control.

It's all just a power grab, my friends. It's about global material wealth and treating people like fools. Every single political, national, and religious leader does this—some more successfully than others—and that is their only goal. Everyone else who takes their side, supports them, or defends their faith—meaning their "interpretations" or ideologies—is either incredibly naive and doesn't get what's actually happening, or they're part of the inner circle, acting like co-conspirators to reap some material profit. There is no third explanation.

As for the movie, any religion could make one just like it, filled with authentic footage like decapitations and other gore, and use it as propaganda against any other religion. Every single one of them has left behind a massive, filthy, and bloody criminal record throughout history.

Peace.

Sandra Wilson68 said:I just caught up on this thread, watched the video, and read through all the posts carefully.

Honestly, I've been obsessed for years with this whole "us vs. them" phenomenon—how the world splits itself up by countries, ideologies, political parties, religions, and nations. It's the root of almost every major evil on Earth. You don't have to be a genius to see that these divisions are just a facade used by specific individuals hungry for global power, fame, and material wealth. The only philosophy that matters here is realizing TO. Once regular people finally grasp TO, the world might actually be saved. When ordinary people TO, it'll mean they've realized how pointless it is to argue over the value of any global ideology, politics, religion, or nation. They'll see that clinging to any of those labels is useless because it doesn't benefit humanity, nor does it serve God; it only serves those bloated global elites at the top of these divides. They view their followers as nothing more than a flock of sheep meant to be sheared and slaughtered.

Seriously, what's the point of the Bible, or spreading any religion to rule the world in the name of some higher power? Get real, people! It's just inviting the devil to your doorstep and nothing else. If you've joined a "philosophy" forum, show at least a little bit of philosophical depth—meaning, learn to distance yourself from all this nonsense and think for yourself, instead of acting manipulated and playing ”interpreter by trying to defend one side or another. Just look at what David says:

DAVID,
P.S. A translation of the Bible isn't enough to understand the message of a specific verse. You need interpretation. A translation isn't an interpretation. God interprets the verses for chosen leaders. (These could even be ordinary people who have reached high spiritual levels). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration end up falling into various traps. Some of those traps include the extremists the film refers to.

What kind of ”interpreters in high positions” are you talking about, David? Watch your mouth: “God interprets the verses for chosen leaders”. Which God? Where is this God, David? Show him to us or at least explain him. Explain how we're supposed to know which one God actually chose among the countless ”“interpreters in high positions” (of the Bible or other texts), since everyone interprets things their own way. It's obvious He didn't choose all of them, because if He had, they would all interpret things the exact same way, not differently. And I'm really curious if you and Shaun are among those ”chosen interpreters in high positions”, since I see you two interpreting religious texts and spreading faith online for years now?

Don't get mad at me and think I'm representing some global ideology, nation, or religion against any faith. This is my personal, philosophical conviction that applies equally to every group and division in the world. That said, when it comes to Islamic culture, I've studied it for a long time and appreciate its ethics and worldview quite a bit. I'd love to see the Western world adopt some of that culture and ethics, provided that part of it is stripped of all religious dogma.

Just a heads-up: don't assume that because of everything I've said, I'm an ”unbeliever”, or an atheist, or one of those people that religion needs to ”settle scores with”. I know God exists, and I know who and what He is, but I don't belong to any religion. The God I know doesn't want any divisions or religions in this world. Even if we assume the Bible and other texts are from God—that Jesus and Muhammad were..."interpreters" of God's thoughts—and yeah, you're right, those interpretations weren't meant for Christians or Muslims either, because back during their "interpretation" phase, neither group even existed. These "interpretations" were intended for all humanity as a study of good and evil, or just pure philosophy. The fact that people later split apart over these "interpretations"—leading to freezing tensions and wars—that isn't from God, it's from the devil. The whole "divide and conquer" mantra doesn't come from God; it comes from the devil. Anyone keeping that division alive today through organized religion isn't serving God—they're serving the devil. Specifically, they're serving the West. That’s the main playbook and strategy for the West today. Using that tactic, the West uses its ideology called "democracy" to take over the world step by step. First, they pit naive, divided nations and religions against each other, provoking them until they fight, go to war, and bleed each other dry. Then, they can just stroll into the territory as "saviors and judges" and take total control.

It's all just a power grab, my friends. It's about global material wealth and treating people like fools. Every single political, national, and religious leader does this—some more successfully than others—and that is their only goal. Everyone else who takes their side, supports them, or defends their faith—meaning their "interpretations" or ideologies—is either incredibly naive and doesn't get what's actually happening, or they're part of the inner circle, acting like co-conspirators to reap some material profit. There is no third explanation.

As for the movie, any religion could make one just like it, filled with authentic footage like decapitations and other gore, and use it as propaganda against any other religion. Every single one of them has left behind a massive, filthy, and bloody criminal record throughout history.

Peace.

Sandra Wilson68 said:I just caught up on this thread, watched the video, and read through all the posts carefully.

Honestly, I've been obsessed for years with this whole "us vs. them" phenomenon—how the world splits itself up by countries, ideologies, political parties, religions, and nations. It's the root of almost every major evil on Earth. You don't have to be a genius to see that these divisions are just a facade used by specific individuals hungry for global power, fame, and material wealth. The only philosophy that matters here is realizing TO. Once regular people finally grasp TO, the world might actually be saved. When ordinary people TO, it'll mean they've realized how pointless it is to argue over the value of any global ideology, politics, religion, or nation. They'll see that clinging to any of those labels is useless because it doesn't benefit humanity, nor does it serve God; it only serves those bloated global elites at the top of these divides. They view their followers as nothing more than a flock of sheep meant to be sheared and slaughtered.

Seriously, what's the point of the Bible, or spreading any religion to rule the world in the name of some higher power? Get real, people! It's just inviting the devil to your doorstep and nothing else. If you've joined a "philosophy" forum, show at least a little bit of philosophical depth—meaning, learn to distance yourself from all this nonsense and think for yourself, instead of acting manipulated and playing ”interpreter by trying to defend one side or another. Just look at what David says:

DAVID,
P.S. A translation of the Bible isn't enough to understand the message of a specific verse. You need interpretation. A translation isn't an interpretation. God interprets the verses for chosen leaders. (These could even be ordinary people who have reached high spiritual levels). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration end up falling into various traps. Some of those traps include the extremists the film refers to.

What kind of ”interpreters in high positions” are you talking about, David? Watch your mouth: “God interprets the verses for chosen leaders”. Which God? Where is this God, David? Show him to us or at least explain him. Explain how we're supposed to know which one God actually chose among the countless ”“interpreters in high positions” (of the Bible or other texts), since everyone interprets things their own way. It's obvious He didn't choose all of them, because if He had, they would all interpret things the exact same way, not differently. And I'm really curious if you and Shaun are among those ”chosen interpreters in high positions”, since I see you two interpreting religious texts and spreading faith online for years now?

Don't get mad at me and think I'm representing some global ideology, nation, or religion against any faith. This is my personal, philosophical conviction that applies equally to every group and division in the world. That said, when it comes to Islamic culture, I've studied it for a long time and appreciate its ethics and worldview quite a bit. I'd love to see the Western world adopt some of that culture and ethics, provided that part of it is stripped of all religious dogma.

Just a heads-up: don't assume that because of everything I've said, I'm an ”unbeliever”, or an atheist, or one of those people that religion needs to ”settle scores with”. I know God exists, and I know who and what He is, but I don't belong to any religion. The God I know doesn't want any divisions or religions in this world. Even if we assume the Bible and other texts are from God—that Jesus and Muhammad were..."interpreters" of God's thoughts—and yeah, you're right, those interpretations weren't meant for Christians or Muslims either, because back during their "interpretation" phase, neither group even existed. These "interpretations" were intended for all humanity as a study of good and evil, or just pure philosophy. The fact that people later split apart over these "interpretations"—leading to freezing tensions and wars—that isn't from God, it's from the devil. The whole "divide and conquer" mantra doesn't come from God; it comes from the devil. Anyone keeping that division alive today through organized religion isn't serving God—they're serving the devil. Specifically, they're serving the West. That’s the main playbook and strategy for the West today. Using that tactic, the West uses its ideology called "democracy" to take over the world step by step. First, they pit naive, divided nations and religions against each other, provoking them until they fight, go to war, and bleed each other dry. Then, they can just stroll into the territory as "saviors and judges" and take total control.

It's all just a power grab, my friends. It's about global material wealth and treating people like fools. Every single political, national, and religious leader does this—some more successfully than others—and that is their only goal. Everyone else who takes their side, supports them, or defends their faith—meaning their "interpretations" or ideologies—is either incredibly naive and doesn't get what's actually happening, or they're part of the inner circle, acting like co-conspirators to reap some material profit. There is no third explanation.

As for the movie, any religion could make one just like it, filled with authentic footage like decapitations and other gore, and use it as propaganda against any other religion. Every single one of them has left behind a massive, filthy, and bloody criminal record throughout history.

Peace.

Sean Cruz said:First off, I’ve watched the film. In my opinion, the director is doing exactly what Muslim extremists do: cherry-picking verses from the Quran to suit a specific narrative. To set the record straight, I’ll provide the correct translations for the sections the filmmaker took out of context:

Quran, Women – verse 56: Those who disbelieve in Our signs—We will surely cast them into the Fire. Whenever their skins are roasted through, We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the torment. God is truly Powerful and Wise.
My take: This is specifically addressing disbelievers, not followers of other faiths.
Quran, Women – verse 89: They wish you would turn into disbelievers just as they did, so that you would be alike. So do not take them as allies until they emigrate for the cause of God. But if they turn away, seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and do not take any of them as allies or helpers.
Again, this refers to disbelievers (atheists) or polytheists. However, the very next verse clarifies things—verse 90: except for those who seek refuge with a people with whom you have a treaty, or who come to you while they themselves are in difficulty fighting against their own people or fighting against you. If they grant you peace, then God gives you no right against them.
I won't list more; I think this is plenty to make the point.
Furthermore, no major religion supports homosexuality, so I fail to see why that was even brought up.
To wrap this up: yes, Muslim extremists are dangerous, but they aren't any more dangerous than certain Mexican nationalist movements (where religious ideology has been used to justify attempts at territorial expansion and ethnic cleansing).
One last thing:

A man of standing once asked Jesus:
Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?
Jesus answered him:
Why do you call me good?
No one is good except God alone.

Gospel according to Luke, 18, 18-19

Ethan Kim4 said:But what about pantheists, deists, or cult members? Or Agnosticism, which isn't quite the same thing as atheism?
Besides, Christians could technically fall under "polytheists" since they believe in three gods, right?😁

Ethan Kim4 said:But what about pantheists, deists, or cult members? Or Agnosticism, which isn't quite the same thing as atheism?
Besides, Christians could technically fall under "polytheists" since they believe in three gods, right?😁

Sean Cruz As specified by:
Pantheism. It’s one of those heavy concepts that people love to toss around at cocktail parties when they want to sound profound without actually having to commit to a specific doctrine. At its core, it's the idea that the universe and God aren't two separate things, but rather one and the same—that the divine is woven into every atom, every leaf, and every overpriced latte we consume. It’s a tidy little way to feel connected to the cosmos without the baggage of organized religion, though I suspect some might find it a bit too convenient. Still, there is a certain quiet logic to it. If everything is part of the divine, then even my questionable decision-making is technically part of a grand, cosmic design. That’s a comforting thought, isn't it? It doesn't align with any of the monotheistic religions, to be honest. That’s essentially just spiritual atheism.

Sean Cruz As I was saying:
@ David: I just caught your comment. If you find yourself revisiting this thread, would you mind answering a few questions for me?

Jerry Green59 said:

Sean Cruz As specified by:
Pantheism. It’s one of those heavy concepts that people love to toss around at cocktail parties when they want to sound profound without actually having to commit to a specific doctrine. At its core, it's the idea that the universe and God aren't two separate things, but rather one and the same—that the divine is woven into every atom, every leaf, and every overpriced latte we consume. It’s a tidy little way to feel connected to the cosmos without the baggage of organized religion, though I suspect some might find it a bit too convenient. Still, there is a certain quiet logic to it. If everything is part of the divine, then even my questionable decision-making is technically part of a grand, cosmic design. That’s a comforting thought, isn't it? It doesn't align with any of the monotheistic religions, to be honest. That’s essentially just spiritual atheism.

Could you clarify? I'm not quite following.

Sean Cruz As I was saying:
@ David: I just caught your comment. If you find yourself revisiting this thread, would you mind answering a few questions for me?

The moderators have sent David some rather subtle hints that he isn't exactly welcome in this discussion.