Is islam a religion of peace?

[Master Matthew²]

I'm talking about first world countries Mat

What are you talking about, Sharia Progressive law is completely safe and in no way oppressive.

[Ad Bot]

[Scout31]

You know they hang gays from cranes right

You know Christians bomb and lynch people for their skin color right

[Red Spy]

You know Christians bomb and lynch people for their skin color right

I'm talking about stuff that's happening right now

[Master Matthew²]

You know Christians bomb and lynch people for their skin color right

Half a century ago?
Not relevant to instances that happened within the past 3 years.

[RedGajin]

You know they hang gays from cranes right

I'm talking about stuff that's happening right now

christians in africa do the same thing. this isnt the result of a "incompatible" religion, its the result of bigoted people radicalizing religion

[Nonnel]

No, Islam is not a religion of peace. It is both in doctrine and history by far the most violent and destructive belief system on this planet, probably rivaled only by Atheism.

LOL

[Red Spy]

LOL

gottem

[beachbum111111]

No, but I know for a fact that the Bible is violent too and instructs genocide in a couple of places. Those passages typically aren't read in your average church session, and I can't imagine Muslims (which are otherwise unaffiliated with terror organizations) read many of their outdated and barbaric passages either.

Point me to a verse in the new testament that calls for the genocide of a group.

[Magus]

I never said it was dissolved as a result of the crusades. I simply meant it was significantly weakened by them. Jerusalem was brought to ruins as a result of the 70 AD rebellion but it still stood as a city long after that.

The only real way the HRE was weakened by any of the crusades was Frederick Barbarossa dying on his way to the Third and Frederick II being excommunicated after the Fifth. The main cause of its demise was the Thirty Years' War.

[Kringleberg]

rember when christianity killed 30 million people in china

[Nonnel]

gottem

Actually I should've bolded but I was focused on the last part

[Red Spy]

Actually I should've bolded but I was focused on the last part

I see

[Planr]

No, but I know for a fact that the Bible is violent too and instructs genocide in a couple of places. Those passages typically aren't read in your average church session, and I can't imagine Muslims (which are otherwise unaffiliated with terror organizations) read many of their outdated and barbaric passages either.

That is incorrect. The Bible does not instruct Christians to commit genocide. There are instances in the Bible where it details historical accounts of the Israelites being led by God to destroy entire civilizations, such as the Canaanites, but those cases were for a specific case, place, and time. God gave specific reasons to his followers for destroying civilizations and people groups, and even then, they did not kill absolutely everyone. Context is very important.

In the instance of the Canaanites, they were practicing multiple abominable rituals, such as cultic prostitution and child sacrifice by fire. God gave them over 400 years to repent of their ways and they did not, so he sent the Israelites to enact judgment by destroying their civilization. After they had accomplished what God instructed them to do, the commandment was fulfilled and no further action was required.

Islam, unlike Christianity, does not have such historical context restraints on its passages on violence/genocide.

[beachbum111111]

rember when christianity killed 30 million people in china

You talking about the Taiping rebelling? You realize the Christian rebels lost that war and ended up being punished right? Most of the deaths were from disease and famine as well.

[Scout31]

Half a century ago?
Not relevant to instances that happened within the past 3 years.

And 50 years ago, Christianity was still Christianity. Nothing has changed about it, unless the Bible rewrote a few passages over the past few decades. People still did those things in the name of their religion.

My point is still that it's the interpretations and people themselves that are responsible, and not the religions. That's not an issue bound by time, which is why historical examples are still valid. I'm not arguing that bad things aren't happening in the name of Islam, but an entire religion isn't responsible for the actions of a few. I'm sure there's some Christians that would happily hang gays from a crane today, given the chance.

The same argument is supported by gun advocates: It's the shooters fault, not the gun's. A gun is safe when used properly, and dangerous when used by a psycho. A religion safe when read properly, and dangerous when interpreted by a psycho.

Point me to a verse in the new testament that calls for the genocide of a group.

Christianity holds the values of the old and new testament equal. Again, it's just interpretation and reading. Some individual churches or branches of Christianity support one over the other, but that's not a "base Christianity" thing. The new testament is certainly a lot less barbaric, but that doesn't erase the old testament.