> It is commanded by our religion and intellect that the oppressed have a right to return the aggression. Do not await anything from us but Jihad, resistance and revenge.
27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
One may note that the idea of violent resistance to oppression is deeply present in USA too : Right of Revolution and Second Amendment.
It seems you are trying to show the peacefulness of the Christian Bible vs the Quran, but cherry-picking creates a selection bias. If one wants to find verses justifying violence, the New Testament has them too (let alone the old one)
> Matthew 10:34: "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
> Revelation 19:15: "And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron..."
> If one wants to find verses justifying violence, the New Testament has them too
You are saying verses that do justifying violence but the ones you provided are just having the word 'sword' in them. Are you really saying that they tell me as a Christian to do violence?
I'm basically saying cherry-picking creates a selection bias, which invalidated the point trying to be made. However that's a powerful technique to strengthen the idea of those already convinced.
Regarding the verse I'm not sure if they imply you should do the same at home, however it's a possible interpretation.
i’m no apologist for christian history but you are both dancing around the nuances to make your own respective points. both things can be true but they require a lot of words:
the roman republic, and subsequent empire were happy to allow conquered peoples to maintain their own ways of life as long as a few basic (in their estimation) requirements were met (taxes, fealty, etc). it was ripe for corruption to the conquered peoples tended to rebel and they got put down with severe violence
christianity offered a unifying thematic message and de facto polity under which constantine believed he could more effectively maintain power and peace. this system was ripe for corruption but now the people are generally kept in line by the conflation of church and state.
islam arises primarily as a repudiation of polytheism and what is perceived as loose monotheism and nonviolently sweeps through the area quickly.
regional leaders quickly learn the same lesson that constantine learned and use islam to prevent rebellion and exert control, with the added lesson learned that it’s best to just ensure everyone follows the same code from the start so that you don’t have to do a lot of political cleanup in the transition to a new belief system.
fractured “european” leaders realize how much power they’ve lost and decide that they should unify under the christian brand to go take back their power.
> islam arises primarily as a repudiation of polytheism and what is perceived as loose monotheism
I doubt that “repudiation” of said things was the main driver.
I’m pretty sure by 600ad Rome was pretty solidly Christian (or at elite levels, perhaps secular), what other gods did exist were folk/syncretistic practices, which also existed in Islam (sufis, Zoroastrian stuff, gnostic stuff etc) and which still existed today in Christianity (in the Philippines, the Caribbean, Africa, etc)
It was kind of problem that by the time Romans really got into suppressing all kinds of “heresies” and imposing Orthodoxy across the empire. Since most in their Middle Eastern provinces and Egypt weren’t Orthodox Catholic most locals didn’t really bother that much fighting for them since the Muslims at the time just seemed like another Christian sect just with a more hands off attitude to government and possibly lower taxes.
Yeah, also it was the way it happened, we should not judge those times with our vision of things, different times, different values. All religions are a form of control over the peasants, Islam grew and evolved in an area with a set of political and social characteristics and Christianity the same but different ones and that's why you find the differences and the same reason that Islam and Christianity split in several branches. And you can see east Europe went Orthodox, South Europe went Catholic and North went Protestant, add to that the fights for the power.
It's true that Islam is a Christian heresy but to be fair, Islam tries to be it's own State Religion only for the Arabs. So in that sense it's not the same God since they don't believe in the Trinity.
Fun fact - not every Christian sect believes in the trinity.
Another fun fact, the Jewish God and the Christian God are the same… it’s just that the Jewish God didn’t have a son who was also himself that killed himself only to resurrect himself negating the sacrifice
Incorrect translation, Allahu Akbar means “the god is the greatest”
Allah is not a name that came with Islam but existed before, it just means deity. the Al prefix is the definite singular form. It just says one thing: god is a singleton and nothing is above it.
When Indian army regiments, with predominantly Sikh soldiers, fight any army, they rally themselves for battle with cries of "Wahe Guru ki Khalsa, Wahe Guru ki Fatah" (which roughly translates to "[We] the pure are of the almighty, and the triumph in making is also of the almighty). Pakistani army, predominantly Muslim soldiers, do use the rallying cry of "Allahu Akbar". It's debatable whether these chants are meant more for themselves, than directed at their "enemies".
Must say it's a little bit lame that they are boycotting iOS. I will not change phone just to use this app but it would be nice to be able to replace SwiftKey with this.
I'm pretty sure there is no way for them to supply an ios version without having to go through some sort of apple approval process. hardly boycotting to say that you're not about to put up with that crap.
Don't they have to go through a Google approval process for (official) Android? I'm not sure I see this as a big win unless they are strictly supporting GrapheneOS and other de-Googled Androids.
they do, but it's on fdroid too - at that point the play store is simply a nice to have. if google does anything they don't like they can just say okay and keep publishing on fdroid, they have not lost whatever efforts they have invested into android. apple has absolutely no way to just publish an app and let people install it, which at least to my mind delegitimises them as a viable platform. I'm pretty sure if I made open source mobile apps they would be android only, people would be free to take the source and release an ios version under different branding.
It's notoriously not on f-droid. The way FUTO licenses and/or builds its thing is made deliberately incompatible with f-droid's main repository.
You can add the futo repository to the f-droid client, but when people talk about f-droid they really mean the main repository, not the extra hoops to add less trusted third parties.
sad, I didn't realise that because their website has an "install from f-droid" link. it does reinforce my point that android is a proper platform with a viable distribution mechanism though, if they can self host a third party repository.
Do you have info on that? All the internet tells me that there is a tracking station there, no spaceport. And if one wanted to use a local spaceport, I suppose the Norwegian one would be close enough.
> The EuroPA alliance, which has already connected Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Andorra since March 2025, serves as a prototype. Six million euros have passed through it in one year, without any particular promotional campaign.
27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
reply