Muslim prayer hall set on fire in Corsica

[Kriga]

Oh please check your facts. i may as well say that Christianity has no place in Europe. After all, it did originate from israel/Palestine. It has no place in Europe. Oh wait, it does...

You know, after the Christians ensured that paganism was wiped out through mass conversions, burnings and deaths. Christianity truly is a great religion. Oh yeah, 10/10.

Even though I am not Christian, I wouldn't say that about Christianity. Christianity's a great religion to be a part of because the big 3 as I call them: Judaism, Christianity and Islam all believe in 1 God and the Day of Judgement. So those 3 religions and other religions are great, beautiful, etc. It's the adherents that aren't so great.

All these three 'big' religions have blood on their hand. There is no 'greatness' in them because scripturally, they are backward, convoluted and contradictory.

It gives me the Ten commandments, only to break them in the case of sodomites and non-believers. History has clearly put those words to affect. So i can say that about Christianty. Not just because i have a right to say so, but because it is very, very accurate.

[Kubumba Tribe]

Even though I am not Christian, I wouldn't say that about Christianity. Christianity's a great religion to be a part of because the big 3 as I call them: Judaism, Christianity and Islam all believe in 1 God and the Day of Judgement. So those 3 religions and other religions are great, beautiful, etc. It's the adherents that aren't so great.

All these three 'big' religions have blood on their hand. There is no 'greatness' in them because scripturally, they are backward, convoluted and contradictory.

It gives me the Ten commandments, only to break them in the case of sodomites and non-believers. History has clearly put those words to affect. So i can say that about Christianty. Not just because i have a right to say so, but because it is very, very accurate.

Religions don't have blood on their hands. The people who kill for no reason in the name of religion have blood on their hands.

[Farnhamia]

Hail Victory!

*** 1 day ban for trolling. ***

[Genivaria]

All these three 'big' religions have blood on their hand. There is no 'greatness' in them because scripturally, they are backward, convoluted and contradictory.

It gives me the Ten commandments, only to break them in the case of sodomites and non-believers. History has clearly put those words to affect. So i can say that about Christianty. Not just because i have a right to say so, but because it is very, very accurate.

Religions don't have blood on their hands. The people who kill for no reason in the name of religion have blood on their hands.

No reason? They kill because their scriptures command it.

[Kubumba Tribe]

Religions don't have blood on their hands. The people who kill for no reason in the name of religion have blood on their hands.

No reason? They kill because their scriptures command it.

Scripture in many religions only calls for killing if you are in war, not any other time. Even then, in Islam there's a certain way you fight.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

No reason? They kill because their scriptures command it.

Scripture in many religions only calls for killing if you are in war, not any other time. Even then, in Islam there's a certain way you fight.

A Muslim can only fight if his/her opponent throws the 1st punch.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Scripture in many religions only calls for killing if you are in war, not any other time. Even then, in Islam there's a certain way you fight.

A Muslim can only fight if his/her opponent throws the 1st punch.

And if the opponent surrenders, then he/she/they must stop.

[Vaticantopia]

A Muslim can only fight if his/her opponent throws the 1st punch.

And if the opponent surrenders, then he/she/they must stop.

Too bad that's not realistic (most of the time)

[Crockerland]

Scripture in many religions only calls for killing if you are in war, not any other time. Even then, in Islam there's a certain way you fight.

A Muslim can only fight if his/her opponent throws the 1st punch.

Unless their opponent has failed to pay the Jizya, of course.

[Gauthier]

A Muslim can only fight if his/her opponent throws the 1st punch.

Unless their opponent has failed to pay the Jizya, of course.

Everyone on the Internet has a Doctorate in Islamic Studies!

[Crockerland]

Unless their opponent has failed to pay the Jizya, of course.

Everyone on the Internet has a Doctorate in Islamic Studies!

A doctorate? All I need is a Quran.

[The Princes of the Universe]

Unless their opponent has failed to pay the Jizya, of course.

Everyone on the Internet has a Doctorate in Islamic Studies!

I only have an Associate's...

[Gauthier]

Everyone on the Internet has a Doctorate in Islamic Studies!

A doctorate? All I need is a Quran.

So where in the Quran does it say it's permissible to strike someone who hasn't payed jizya?

[Kriga]

All these three 'big' religions have blood on their hand. There is no 'greatness' in them because scripturally, they are backward, convoluted and contradictory.

It gives me the Ten commandments, only to break them in the case of sodomites and non-believers. History has clearly put those words to affect. So i can say that about Christianty. Not just because i have a right to say so, but because it is very, very accurate.

Religions don't have blood on their hands. The people who kill for no reason in the name of religion have blood on their hands.

Mhm, so did Constantine I have no reason for slaughtering Roman pagans because they didn't want to convert? Did the Prophet Muhammad kill for no reason when he fought for his religion's survival?

Your assertion that people who kill for no reason in the name of religion is naive. The world has been fighting over religious supremacy for centuries until secularism came along. And to this day, religious violence persists, the people blinded by their beliefs.

[Jochistan]

Everyone on the Internet has a Doctorate in Islamic Studies!

A doctorate? All I need is a Quran.

You're applying Protestant logic to the Qur'an.

That never works. See the Wahhabi movement.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

And if the opponent surrenders, then he/she/they must stop.

Too bad that's not realistic (most of the time)

True

[Crockerland]

A doctorate? All I need is a Quran.

You're applying Protestant logic to the Qur'an.

That never works. See the Wahhabi movement.

Yeah, it's always all the fault of the ebul Wahhabies, that seems to be a theme with regressive left islamic apologists; Too bad for you there are so many shiite terrorists (IE: Hezbollah, the Houthis, Asaib Ahl al-Haq) who have nothing to do with the Wahabbi movement.

By "applying Protestant logic" do you mean "not just discarding anything which makes the religion sound bad"?

[Jochistan]

You're applying Protestant logic to the Qur'an.

That never works. See the Wahhabi movement.

Yeah, it's always all the fault of the ebul Wahhabies, that seems to be a theme with regressive left islamic apologists; Too bad for you there are so many shiite terrorists (IE: Hezbollah, the Houthis, Asaib Ahl al-Haq) who have nothing to do with the Wahabbi movement.

By "applying Protestant logic" do you mean "not just discarding anything which makes the religion sound bad"?

You're honestly calling me a regressive leftist. Goodnight my sides!

There are indeed some among the shi'ites. The Twelvers are mostly hardliners anyway.

But yes. The Salafi movement is by far the biggest and practically the most relavent threat in Islam and the face of it's fundamentalism. And there are a fucking lot of them. Over a third of Muslims almost.

The Shi'a hardliners are a problem too, but pale in number compared to Salafis.
Name one movwmovent as big or as relevant as they are.that aren't even influenced by them.

And by protestant logic I mean rejecting the clear commentary by scholars of the past that throughly explain what you find issue with.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

You're applying Protestant logic to the Qur'an.

That never works. See the Wahhabi movement.

Yeah, it's always all the fault of the ebul Wahhabies, that seems to be a theme with regressive left islamic apologists; Too bad for you there are so many shiite terrorists (IE: Hezbollah, the Houthis, Asaib Ahl al-Haq) who have nothing to do with the Wahabbi movement.

By "applying Protestant logic" do you mean "not just discarding anything which makes the religion sound bad"?

What do you mean?

[Grand Britannia]

...Because that's what happens.

Watch.

True, this is NSG.

I'm waiting for the "DEUS VULT"s and "AVE EUROPA"s right now.

DEUS VULT.

I mean the other phrase isn't even that strong, but Deus Vult is definitely chant-able.

[Jochistan]

You're applying Protestant logic to the Qur'an.

That never works. See the Wahhabi movement.

Yeah, it's always all the fault of the ebul Wahhabies, that seems to be a theme with regressive left islamic apologists; Too bad for you there are so many shiite terrorists (IE: Hezbollah, the Houthis, Asaib Ahl al-Haq) who have nothing to do with the Wahabbi movement.

By "applying Protestant logic" do you mean "not just discarding anything which makes the religion sound bad"?

Seiously. Apologist is just code for someone defending something you don't agree with.

It's a buzzword used to somehow automatically discredit people giving a defensive position on something.

And seriously, what the hell gives you the idea that I'm a regressive leftist? I'm not even leftist.

[Kriga]

Yeah, it's always all the fault of the ebul Wahhabies, that seems to be a theme with regressive left islamic apologists; Too bad for you there are so many shiite terrorists (IE: Hezbollah, the Houthis, Asaib Ahl al-Haq) who have nothing to do with the Wahabbi movement.

By "applying Protestant logic" do you mean "not just discarding anything which makes the religion sound bad"?

You're honestly calling me a regressive leftist. Goodnight my sides!

There are indeed some among the shi'ites. The Twelvers are mostly hardliners anyway.

But yes. The Salafi movement is by far the biggest and practically the most relavent threat in Islam and the face of it's fundamentalism. And there are a fucking lot of them. Over a third of Muslims almost.

The Shi'a hardliners are a problem too, but pale in number compared to Salafis.
Name one movwmovent as big or as relevant as they are.that aren't even influenced by them.

And by protestant logic I mean rejecting the clear commentary by scholars of the past that throughly explain what you find issue with.

Yet, no one seems to combat the Salafi movement, or any other hardline moment.

Could it be because most Muslims are socially conservative and support the destruction of anything against their religion? Look no further than Bangladesh to know that's true.

[Jochistan]

You're honestly calling me a regressive leftist. Goodnight my sides!

There are indeed some among the shi'ites. The Twelvers are mostly hardliners anyway.

But yes. The Salafi movement is by far the biggest and practically the most relavent threat in Islam and the face of it's fundamentalism. And there are a fucking lot of them. Over a third of Muslims almost.

The Shi'a hardliners are a problem too, but pale in number compared to Salafis.
Name one movwmovent as big or as relevant as they are.that aren't even influenced by them.

And by protestant logic I mean rejecting the clear commentary by scholars of the past that throughly explain what you find issue with.

Yet, no one seems to combat the Salafi movement, or any other hardline moment.

Could it be because most Muslims are socially conservative and support the destruction of anything against their religion? Look no further than Bangladesh to know that's true.

Jamaat e Islami is a pretty explicitly Salafi organization

[Kriga]

Yet, no one seems to combat the Salafi movement, or any other hardline moment.

Could it be because most Muslims are socially conservative and support the destruction of anything against their religion? Look no further than Bangladesh to know that's true.

Jamaat e Islami is a pretty explicitly Salafi organization

]

That's not what i was referring to.

If Salafist movements are so dangerous, why haven't they been actively pursued, hunted down and purged? Why aren't Muslims trying to reform their religion and weed out the extremist elements?

[Jochistan]

You're honestly calling me a regressive leftist. Goodnight my sides!

There are indeed some among the shi'ites. The Twelvers are mostly hardliners anyway.

But yes. The Salafi movement is by far the biggest and practically the most relavent threat in Islam and the face of it's fundamentalism. And there are a fucking lot of them. Over a third of Muslims almost.

The Shi'a hardliners are a problem too, but pale in number compared to Salafis.
Name one movwmovent as big or as relevant as they are.that aren't even influenced by them.

And by protestant logic I mean rejecting the clear commentary by scholars of the past that throughly explain what you find issue with.

Yet, no one seems to combat the Salafi movement, or any other hardline moment.

Could it be because most Muslims are socially conservative and support the destruction of anything against their religion? Look no further than Bangladesh to know that's true.

And the Salafi Wahhabi dogma and other hardline movements are combated strongly in parts of Southeast Asia and North Africa.

Bangladesh actually has a great deal of Anti Hardliner movements. And Hardliners in general seem to be a minority in government positions and in the polls.

But most Strongly in The Balkans and Turkic World.

As for the lack of resistence, Muhammad Iqbal and many others correctly assessed that Quietist Fatalism among Cultural Muslims and Aesthetic Sufism has been a source of withdrawlal and lack of change.