Well?

independent.co.uk/voices/islam-muslim-terrorism-islamist-extremism-quran-teaching-violence-meaning-prophet-muhammed-a7676246.html

Despite over 100 Jihad messages and centuries of Islam-motivated terror attacks, it turns out the Quran doesn't promote violence and you're all basically fucking stupid.

Other urls found in this thread:

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4414248/Explosion-kills-evacuees-bus-convoy-near-Aleppo.html
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4547260/Manchester-bomber-friends-boy-gang-raped-girl.html
thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/opinion-polls.aspx
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

maybe but remember Wahhabism (it's pretty much their version of radical chauvinism)

Historically speaking, they can be enlightened.
The West also had their own Protestant heresies but thank God they're weaker now and pretty much just a meme

>I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.

8:12

>And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

2:191

>And as for those who disbelieved, I will punish them with a severe punishment in this world and the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers.

3:56

(((Rashid)))

Also that guy is probably an Islamic reformer/liberal so basically a faggot

Thank you honestbro

image nullifies his argument. Quran directly calls for violence and terror in an effort to expand Islamic territory.

>Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment, Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

5:33-34

Wahhabism is their version of reading the koran and doing what it says to do

It doesn't matter how you interpret the book, it matters how others do you fucking kangaroo fucker

So when he said "allahu ackbar" he really meant "Islam is a peaceful religion and I am a lone terrorist!!"

People don't understand how to read Quran. The later writings supercede the earlier ones (because the book is retarded and contradicts itself constantly and that's the way mudshits decided to reconcile the contradictions).

>Indeed, Allah loves those who fight in His cause in a row as though they are a [single] structure joined firmly.

61:4

>O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous.

9:123

>that book doesn't say that
You might want to tell the Muslims that, m8. No matter how much that book doesn't say that, they've been using to justify killing each other since Mohammad died.
Now, their leaving their sandbox and using it as justification to kill non- Muslims, world wide.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4414248/Explosion-kills-evacuees-bus-convoy-near-Aleppo.html
They willing kill women and children fleeing a battlefield.

Fucking libcucks would still hear all of this and then tell you, "well it's out of context you Islamaphobe!"

kek

It has peace and love st the start and the latter half is violence and genocide advocating. The rule is if two things contradict, treat the latter thing as truth. Liberals quote the useless stuff that is overruled as the book goes on in favor of all the killing and destroying of infidels.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4547260/Manchester-bomber-friends-boy-gang-raped-girl.html

oh look it's another "don't read the quran go-- kafir, we know better"

...

I read the quran twice and he's partially right. The Quran doesn't directly advocate terrorism. Most of the war verses are talking about battles that happened and shit. However once you pair it with the Hadith then you see stories of Muhammad stabbing pregnant women, people who write poetry against him, apostles and dying his beard red like a faggot. Most terorrists get their inspiration from the Hadith, and there are few muslims who reject the hadith outright.

Also the Quran DOES advocate
-treating women like shit
-beating people for adultry
-turning jews into apes
-slapping dead people with beef so they come back to life
-being a general backwater fucking caveman for the rest of eternity because some guy in 600AD said it was the way to eternal life.

So it's a half truth.

it's true

when people say interpretation they really mean it


those who attack the civilians in europe see them as being responsible for what the governments have done in the middle east for 20 years now starting with bush

There is a report narrated by Ahmad (1691) from the hadeeth of Abu ‘Ubaydah, who said that the last words that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) spoke were, “Expel the Jews of the Hijaaz and Najraan from the Arabian Peninsula, and know that the most evil of people are those who took the graves of their Prophets as places of worship.”

those verses are within the context of war and being oppressed

only a retard would see free violence from those verses, retards like you

this is blatantly wrong

i find the hypocrisy painful when you folks criticize trudeau for saying that if you kill your enemies they win, then in turn say to muslims who follow the quran that if THEY kill their enemies WHO ATTACK THEM, they lose

The problem with the Quran is that the first half is peaceful and most libcucks probably just stop there. The second half is completely different.

Yeah, Islam is supposed to be at war with everyone who isn't a Muslim.

you forgetting the 1000 years of muslim conquest, mohammed?

Whoever says the quran DOESN'T advocate violence is a naive cuck bitch who will gladly take muzzie dick in the butt.

Yeah oppressed by all those fags, right? And that Trudeau quote is fake you cuck.

70,000 headless corpses are testament to the peacefulness of Islam.

>This passage totally makes the other passage not exist

>tells you to slay unbelievers and raid caravans already in the 2 out if 140 chapters
>peaceful

>be poojeet
>raised muslim
>leave it because its a medieval death cult
If I tried leaving it in some MENA shithole I would be dead.

What's wrong you stupid cunt?

Oh and also, with the quran, if it says on page one not to do violence, but then on page two it says to do violence, page two supersedes page one.

I bet leftists don't even know that, they just assume all the references to violence are metaphors, because THEY feel like they've been socialized beyond violence, exploding goatfuckers don't think this way and never will.

People keep talking about how Islam needs to be reformed, ISIS is Islam's reformation. The quaran is a violent book, and ISIS takes it literally.

This. The OPs marginally unoffensive verse was written while muhamad (penis be inside him) was in mecca. He was unsuccessful in growing his current
Time at that time and had to play nice with his drunken ramblings, or get kicked out along with his handful of gullible followers. When he did get kicked out he went to Medina and that's where he felt liberated to write all the particularly awful and violent bits. These latter Medina part "supersedes" the earlier peaceful mecca part. All muslims know this, but Taqiya let's them lie about it if it furthers the spread of Islam (actual verse saying that)

oppressed by the west, like in syria

when will you finally admit, just like trump did, that your taxes is being used to finance people who oppresse the syrian people in syria?
what does that have to do with anything?

conquests are not forbidden but they are not an obligation either

fighting off oppression is an obligation

that's the difference
blatantly false
how do i know it's false?
the quran talks about making deals with christians, muslims, pagans

once again, you are just like the extremist who deliberately misinterpret the quran

It clearly states that the war is against non-believers you retard.

The first half is peaceful? It's talking about amputation and crucifixion as soon as chapter 5. And of the hatred Allah has towards disbelievers as soon as the first pace.

Watch these faggots defend islam the same way they defend communism.

Leftists/communists/muslims, peas in a fucking pod.

You mean in the context of wars that the cocksucker started, yes? His battles were well documented and in 90% of them he was the attacker.

yes, those who oppress you

in the quran, a person self identifying as a muslim but transgressing the quran is also a nonbeliever

retard this is exactly what the article talk about this is in self-defence

>French flag
>Defends Islam

p o t t e r y

Muslims are pagans.

that's a blatant lie

the prophet was persecuted at first, giving him the moral right to defend himself, then push back, and finally drive the knife through the heart of his enemies

you're just a christcuck who loves to turn the other cheek

"i have come not to bring peace but a sword" said jesus

you're a shame
kill yourself
less than chinks and japs

Conquest is actively encouraged.

>the quran talks about making deals with christians, muslims, pagans
The deal is entering a contract in which Christians and Jews do not have to fight in the army, and there are harsh punishments for Muslims who attack those protected people. This entails submitting to the rules of Islam after conquest, and they must pay a certain amount of gold or be killed. Very peaceful.

OMG the "war" is only a metaphor!!!

That wasn't REAL communism!!!!!

They are all just Pharisaism forked for different usergroups.

>pork is halal
>use the blood of humans to fertilize your grain
>feed the bread to your Muslim airy
>human, the other white meat.

>country has muslim immigrants
>gets bombed
>country doesn't
>doesn't get bombed

It's not hard math.

In classical Islamic law, the major division are dar al-islam (lit. territory of Islam), denoting regions where Islamic law prevails,[3] dar al-sulh (lit. territory of treaty) denoting non-Islamic lands which have concluded an armistice with a Muslim government,[4] and dar al-harb (lit. territory of war), denoting adjoining non-Islamic lands whose rulers are called upon to accept Islam.[5]

>Conquest is actively encouraged.
it is not encouraged in the quran

>Islam doesn't advocate violence
They are responsible for the biggest genocide in human history.

the independent is owned by ex-KGB

>those who oppress you

>these westerners wont let me come to their country to rape their women and take their tax money and instate sharia law
>im so le oppressed

Islam is a political movement, it also clearly states in the quran if the government of wherever they live isn't islamic in origin, it is their divine duty to overthrow the government and instate an islamic one.

>the prophet was persecuted at first
Mo was lucky the Meccans didn't kill him. If people had behaved towards Muslims how Mo behaved towards the Meccans, they and everyone they knew would have been killed.

Cheery picked messages.

Chronologically it started peaceful than got extremely violent by the end of it. All the peaceful messages were from Muhammad's hippy phase.

>Claim self-defense
>Bomb little kids
>Profit¡¡

>The deal is entering a contract in which Christians and Jews do not have to fight in the army, and there are harsh punishments for Muslims who attack those protected people. This entails submitting to the rules of Islam after conquest, and they must pay a certain amount of gold or be killed. Very peaceful.

you're talking about something else all together

the quran talks about deals, treaties and such among existing tribes and empires and kingdoms, not exclusively for dominated peoples


you're misrepresenting what is written in the quran

How can there be "historical context" for the eternal immutable Koran?

It's nature as Allah's book for all time destroys your idiotic "historical context" narrative

Good job parent. Just avoid the cultists and there war an apostates.

Yes it is. In fact the Quran, merely by documenting the conquests of early Islam, encourages conquest. "How," you ask. Well, because Muhammad is the man that all Muslims must strive to emulate.

Really activates the almonds when things like the OP article talk about "people of the book" (Jews, Christians, etc) and how Muzzies were all nice to them, but not realising that that relations between these religions have never been set in stone.

It's true that in points in history Christians and Jews were exempt from taxes within Caliphates, but it was entirely dependent on who was leading the said Caliphate. Fuck the Independent.

the war isn't a metaphor you fucking retard

you're acting passive aggressive now
i don't care what arabs believe in, i only read what's in the quran
wanna know how i know you're a double digit iq retard?

because you completely omit the destruction of iraq, libya and syria by nato and most importantly the USA

drool in your own saliva

the meccans tried to kill him and failed

the case is closed

they tried to oppress mo and they failed

What agreements, what deals, what treaties with the non-Islamic world?

who said historical context, only you

the context is the context you're currently in
the quran doesn't encourages conquest, this is a blatant lie

so all you have to do is argue muslims are being oppressed by the west and its time to let the bodies hit the floor

anything diplomats engage in daily

Daily reminder that anyone, ANYONE who claims they can judge who is 'real' muslim and who isn't is a sinner in the eyes of Allah, Alhamdulillah.

Totally justifies his conquest of the entire Arab peninsula and some of the Levant, and the subsequent Rashidun conquest of basically the whole middle east and North Africa.

there needs to be proof

The teachings of Confucius and Buddah are closer to the Laws handed down by the God of Abraham than anything Muhammed ever said, and they never even heard of Him. Islam is like if you took the absolute worst parts of paganism, and removed all the good parts. In that sense Islam is truly the purest form of paganism, stripped of all truth, beauty, reason, and the Light of God. Enjoy your genies lol

yes, it does

should the syrian arab army only suffice itself with driving out ISIS out of syria, or should they also proceed to help out surrounding allied countries in driving out ISIS?

that's an arab belief
i don't give a shit about budda or confus

When the leader of the Ummah emulates Muhammad, he is obliged to wage offensive jihad until such a point the the whole world witnesses that there is no god by Allah.

Deny it all you want, but there is plenty of evidence in the literature and in the real historical precedent.

You wanna know how I know you have a muslim's dick in your asshole right now?

So you just go ahead and keep on flagellating yourself, surely your conquerors will let you live as a eunuch fuck hole or something.

So now they're oppressed, according to you, now they're coming to the west and fucking our shit up, and it's now OUR duty, according to this white flag waving little faggot, to roll over and let it happen, because this retarded book says so.

You are not French.

>the quran doesn't encourages conquest, this is a blatant lie
Quads don't lie Muslims under Taqiya do.

Alright, cuck, you're arguments moot when the majority of Muslims support ISIS and terrorist activities.

There are literally hundreds of polls which show this.

Why argue that the book is peaceful and promotes non violence when the actual people themselves are rabid dogs who do violent, subhuman stuff in the name of Islam anyway?

Sources: thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/opinion-polls.aspx

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

So you've changed the topic to the modern world where most "Muslim" states are engaging in kufr and accepting dominion of the west?

i will not read your post, you are being crass and homophobic

Islam is based on Judaism
Jews weaponized Arabs against enemies of Jews
Later, Arabs turned on Jews because they were not needed anymore. Besides, most of the Jews who started Islam had ridden across the North of Africa to come to the aid of Jews in Visigoth Hispania.

Don't believe unreservedly in everything in the Quran? Not a Muslim. It's really that simple!

...

I love how liberals (and sometimes muslims) come to defend islam with the typical

“…if any one killed a person, it would be as if he killed the whole of mankind; and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole of mankind…” Quran 5:32

But they never shows what follows, they never show what's the context of that quote, literally Taquiyya
Lets see what's actually on chapter 5 verse 32 of the quran:

"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land."

1 - It explicitly states that this was a commandment to the Children of Israel, i.e. the Jews! This is not a commandment to Muslims

2 - Even if this were a command to the Muslims, there's still an escape clause: "unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land." If someone is "spreading mischief", he can still be killed. Now let's think for a moment. A bomber considers Westerners to be spreading mischief in Palestine or the middle east and around the world (practically all Muslims I know think this, even the ones who are American citizens). Accordingly, even if this verse were to apply to all the terrorists, they would still be justified in their slaughter.

What's most interesting is that liberals never show the following verse, Qur'an 5:33 says
"The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter."

>lalala i cant hear you
>*distant bomb noises*

You should just leave Sup Forums then, you baguette riding bitch.

>Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuou
it's not violence, it's self defence

and yes there's nothing wrong with self defence

the other verses are great, they allow you to drive out those who drove you out of your land, see what the SAA is doing

they're applying those verses to a T

Those damned Egyptians and their persecution of Poor Muhammad in Mecca.

IT'S CALLED ABROGATION YOU DUMB FUX.

TAQIYYA 101.

LATER SHIT KURAN REPLACES OLDER SHIT KURAN

WAKE UP FROM YOUR LAZINESS PLEASE FUX

>what is judging a tree by its fruit

im not discussing what the actual arabs believe in, we're discussing what's written in the quran

and i have every right, and reality, to say that they are wrong in their beliefs

OP = rekt

Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle).

Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle. The targets of violence are "those who disbelieve" - further defined in the next verse (13) as "defy and disobey Allah." Nothing is said about self-defense. In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people.