Context is important. I agree. And no I didn't read the original post. OK, your statement was hyperbole and not meant to be taken literally but rather used to illustrate a point. No problem.
That said, you still have a serious problem with your assertion. Understanding what that is begins with coming to recognize that Islam is a false religious cult fabricated by a disillusioned Allah in a cave (much like the false religious cult of Mormonism was fabricated by a disillusioned Joseph Smith in a cave) while Christianity is the genuine article.
So it is no surprise then that there is a stark contrast between the epistemology of Islam and the epistemology of Christianity.
When a Muslim murders and enslaves non-Muslims to propagate the false religious cult of Islam fabricated by a disillusioned man named Allah in a cave much like the religious cult of Mormonism was fabricated by a disillusioned Joseph Smith in a cave, they are following the religious epistemology of Islam and fully expecting to be carnally rewarded in the afterlife for doing so.
Christianity, on the other hand, teaches the opposite meaning that when a Muslim commits domestic terrorist acts to further the submission of the world to the false pagan god Allah they are acting in accordance with the religious epistemology of Islam; however, if a Christian does so they are violating the religious epistemology of Christianity.
To use a metaphor, it's apples and orange. There is no 1:1 correlation between them on this issue so attempting to draw that correlation fails. Rather the two worldviews are diametrically opposed with respect to what we define today as domestic terrorism and uncorrelatable.
Now obviously all metaphysical epistemologies, including all religions as well as atheism, posit truth claims (which may be true or false) for people and societies which are often inculcated into political ideologies that affect government to one extent or another.
In the case of Islam, due to its rigid codified legal system, they are inseparably intertwined. The ramifications by now should be growing clear to you. When a theocratic Islamic nation commits acts of violence and human enslavement to spread Islam; it is justified in Islam.
However, there is no justification in Christianity for warring against and enslaving human beings for the purpose of furthering Christianity.
Certainly, as the one true genuine religious worldview, Christianity makes truth-claims that nations would be wise to incorporate into their various political systems but Christianity is not a theocratic political state religion like Islam.
So its no surprise that there is a contrast here too between an Islamic state executing violence and human enslavement to further Islam and non-Islamic states executing violence and human enslavement to further their own interests. For example, when the Soviet Union, whose metaphysical worldview was state atheism, engaged in the atrocious behavior; they were doing it to increase their own power on behalf of a non-religious political ideology.
In the case of the U.S., when they do it, they are acting not as a theocratic state religious entity but rather as a political entity and it needs to be stated in violation of the metaphysical worldview that greatly influenced their origin and initial development (though today the development is influenced primarily by liberal secularism).
Now none of this is to dismiss the agency of self-defense, just-war theory, etc... often argued with respect to Christian epistemology but rather to educate you further on the topic so that hopefully you come to understand them better.
And now I digress, so humor me: I think it's important to note that Westboro has about forty members from a population of about two billion Christians meaning it's not helpful to use such an infinitesimal handful of people as the basis for assertions about Christianity.
A far more relevant assertion can be made with the latest polling results from the UK which show that one-third of all Muslim students in the UK support violence on behalf of Islam.
And now you know the disparity exists.
Indeed, I did say what I said AgeofKnowledge. However, I have a feeling you may not have read the original post in its entirety (nor picked up the sarcasm I thought was bleeding from between the lines), nor checked the links to the references I posted. You are more than welcome to assert that I have been deceived once you have done so.
My statement that purported Christians have carried out terrorist attacks and that therefore all Christians are evil was absurd and wrong. Of course it was - you're right on that. Along with my other statements that all men, white males, NFL players, Americans/Aussies/Brits are evil, because of the evil that is regularly perpetrated by a select few from those groups. My point was to show the absurdity of PennEd's logic in distrusting any and all (1.5 billion) Muslims based on the evil actions of IS - who are we to judge any one group as more evil?
I'm glad you mentioned RAND. I would like to see evidence of FBI white-washing, as I'm a happy consumer of conspiracy theories as much as the next guy. I take my references from the Global Terrorism Database, an open-source record of terrorist attacks collated by the University of Maryland in conjunction with other universities. Academia on the whole has less reason to fudge the numbers (maybe).
In any case, their database confirms what you found. We can agree that domestic terrorism in the US has been committed by a diverse range of people for diverse reasons, including the Boston attacks carried out by people claiming to be Muslims. I believe this reaffirms the notion that anyone from any group is capable of evil, and it is therefore absurd to single out an entire group to shun (as my original post intended to point out.)
Finally, I am also in complete agreement with you that terror attacks carried out by people claiming to be Christians - such as those from the Army of God - can hardly be believed to be genuine Christians who have received Jesus Christ. However, the "holy war" I was disparaging was in fact the "holy war" in which certain "Christians" believe it is their right to firebomb, shoot and otherwise murder doctors who perform abortions, non-Christians and gay people, in God's name. I cannot think of anything more unholy than dragging God's name through the mud with personal hatred and violence.
That's why we have a responsibility to call out any discrimination against all Muslims that flares up (case in point: this thread) when an extremist group like IS claims to kill in the name of Allah. I know I hate when people point to the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church, or the Army of God, and assume that because we both claim the name of 'Christian', we are a unified cohort. I do not condone murdering doctors who perform abortions, just as many Muslims do not condone beheadings of non-believers.
I hope I've addressed your concerns, and thanks for taking the time to respond.
, there are really nice Muslims out there, too. And, I still feel it would be wrong to judge them all as if they were terrorists. Prejudices. Prejudices. I don't blame you all for not trusting. Really, I don't. Because I know how crazy and fanatical this religion is. But, I choose not to discriminate all of them on the basis of the actions of a few. I will still treat my Muslim friends and acquaintances with respect, and show them Christly love. Maybe, just maybe, I will win one more soul for the Kingdom of Heaven.
