You correctly point out that it is the investment claim itself that is fraudulent, but then you apply guilt by association to the medium (sacrifice) - which is fallacious. That is like saying that one shouldn't buy bonds because the company they invested in went belly-up. It's a false analogy.

You can not condemn sacrifice without also condemning investment for they are one and the same.

blarman- thanks, I think the prof is right, faith requires sacrifice.
I like your thinking but I cannot accept-
'I have no problem with the concept of sacrifice.'
The concept of sacrifice is a cover, it uses flattery by telling the victim what a fine fellow he is, this diverts attention from the nature of the promised reward which is always an illusion. It is not associated with investment- delayed satisfaction, a rational evaluation of jam today v. jam tomorrow, it is an emotional technique to get another person to commit violence in exchange for a non-existent reward, a fraud.

Fair enough

I will disagree in that the very foundational definition of sacrifice is to give up getting something right now in favor of getting something better in the future. Sacrifice in economic terms is called investment: you are saving that $1000 you COULD be spending on a nice, new flat-screen TV so that in a year, you can get that same nice, new flat-screen TV for $600 and you'll have the interest on your $1000 to boot. There is absolutely nothing wrong with investment. The real question is whether you are being sold a false hope.

I have no problem with the concept of sacrifice. I have REAL problems with hypocrisy, because it is a blatant illustration of fraud. In this case, these very same people who are saying that you have to "prove" your devotion to Allah by blowing up non-believers aren't the ones doing it themselves. They don't believe in their own philosophy enough to carry through with it themselves, so they preach it, but don't practice.

I don't even need to go into the absurdity of it all and the 72 virgins thing...