Was what he did justified in the Quran?

Why would that ever matter. The Qu'ran was written by man, like the Bible and is therefore a fallible self serving document used to control the minds of the weak.

Yes

Unless they were muslim, which none were.

>written by man

wikiislam.net/wiki/Scientific_Errors_in_the_Quran#Mathematical_Error_in_Hereditary_Laws

Apparently Allah can't get math right.

It doesn't matter. He did it, and other muslims have done it, and others will do it after this, and it will only get worse. Religions change over time, and right now Islam is in a very poor state.

He did what Islam desires of Muslims.

This just proves math was invented by Shaytan

sura
>If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both.

hadith
>Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot, kill the doer and the receiver.

This

Written by man but dictated by G*d

Was Tim-tam even a Christian?

Yep. All the modern science that requires math is made up by the devil. In order to be one with Allah you need to live in a mud hut covered in shit and lice and barely know how to make wooden tools to make poppy plants come out of the ground.

Aren't Shi'ites pro-Transgender?

They absolutely are. The Iranian government subsidizes sexual reassignments for its people.

Difference is he didn't do it because of his religion, he did it because "muh gobernment"

That's the spirit

If you turn a gay man into a woman, then he isn't gay anymore and his previously sinful sexual preference are no longer sinful.

>not blowing up Feds

What are you, some kind of bootlicker?

...was written by a man
>fix'd

That's just the Iranian government's way of pacifying gays.

So who are the cooler bunch, shia or sunni muslims?

Based ISIS desu, and I'm a communist

Wait.

I was sure you were fucking with me.

Shit, learn something every day. Thanks, m8.

Obscure Islamic sects like Sufism

Wait, is it really called Shia?

I've been calling them Shiite this entire time.

Timothy McVeigh was a self declared agnostic.

Try again

Shiite is the English adjective for it, because whoever coined it was a cheeky lad who knew people would pronounce it like Shite.

Regardless, all this terrorism can be linked back to one source: Saudi Arabia. If we keep backing those fags innocent homos will never stop being killed

>>If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both.
Never says this. The Qur'an condemns homosexuality however it proscribes no punishment, it says they will be punished by God.

I'm going to give away all my possessions to the poor so I can follow Jesus, cut off my balls so I'm not tempted sexually, and write a letter to my parents telling them to fuck off, I'm following Jesus now.

Is what I'm doing justified in the bible?

Shiite is the follower, Shia is the name of the doctrine.

No, how could it be when Islam is the religion of peace, love and unity?

You'll find a lot of people shilling for Shiites, but the truth is that the Sunnis have Saudi Arabia and the Shiites have Iran, and both are absolute poison for humanity.

Is taking selfies justified by the Quran?

You are the cringe for the self hate you fucking commie Muslimdick loving leftist Cuck.
Do you hate the west?
Move to the middle east or Africa then.

*Tip fedora*

Any chance of Christian retaliation? Some kind of "Son of God" terrorist who fucks Muslims up? Sure it'd be terrible but it'd be fucking interesting to see how the world reacts. Why are there no "Christian" Radicals anyways, with all the bullshit in Europe?

Pic related, it's you.

>/pol/ buzzwords

/pol/fag detected

Read the rules of this board and fuck off back to your historical revisionist shit hole.

There were.

It was called "the troubles" in Ireland.

How would it be retaliatory on part of the Christians? If anything the gays should be the one retaliating.

Gay terrorists, now that's something that'd be interesting to see.

Those weren't Christian radicals. They were two different kinds of nationalists who happened to follow two different sects of Christianity.

It's like saying Catholic Mexican gangs and baptist African American gangs are Christian radicals whenever they're fighting over drugs or something.

Nope, that's like saying the Yugoslav wars were over religion.

>leftist
>cuck
>commie
>hate the west
Wew lad. You're the worst kind of /pol/fag; the kind who's probably still in high school and thinks that he needs to use a bunch of buzzword insults to fit in at /pol/

Sir, do you have a license for that edge?
>sheeple

Or the transnistrean war was over orthodox sees competing for jurisdiction.

And this it work?

If you want a real answer then no since the quran does not state that the sentence for homosexuality is death.

Punishment for 'sins' is only for God.

wew that is a ton of buzzwords

it's verse 4:16 of the quran, retard

No. It wasn't. Homosexuality is seen as immoral and punishable if it's "public" enough. But not by death. In the Hanafi school anyway, there is no actual proscribed punishment for it.

He had the atributes of a closo fag

>Sufism
>Sect

Alright. Most Sufis are, I guess. Only the ones that don't try to "integrate" into Ibn Taymiyya fuckery.

Nice /pol/ thread you got here, fag. But... If you haven't read the Atlantic article on ISIS yet btw you should. It explains A LOT in how these "radicalized muslims" see the world and why some malcontents might be pushed into joining ISIS from the first world.

Sample
>To take one example: In September, Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the Islamic State’s chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries such as France and Canada to find an infidel and “smash his head with a rock,” poison him, run him over with a car, or “destroy his crops.” To Western ears, the biblical-sounding punishments—the stoning and crop destruction—juxtaposed strangely with his more modern-sounding call to vehicular homicide. (As if to show that he could terrorize by imagery alone, Adnani also referred to Secretary of State John Kerry as an “uncircumcised geezer.”)

>But Adnani was not merely talking trash. His speech was laced with theological and legal discussion, and his exhortation to attack crops directly echoed orders from Muhammad to leave well water and crops alone—unless the armies of Islam were in a defensive position, in which case Muslims in the lands of kuffar, or infidels, should be unmerciful, and poison away.

[4:15] Those who commit adultery among your women, you must have four witnesses against them, from among you. If they do bear witness, then you shall keep such women in their homes until they die, or until GOD creates an exit for them.*
[4:16] The couple who commits adultery shall be punished.* If they repent and reform, you shall leave them alone. GOD is Redeemer, Most Merciful.
[4:17] Repentance is acceptable by GOD from those who fall in sin out of ignorance, then repent immediately thereafter. GOD redeems them. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise.

Talking about women, and doesn't say death. Dead people can't repent.

theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

durrr i'm smart

Well there was Breivik. And all those Pseudo Fascist groups that say they're going to do it but are too pussy to ever commit.

Yeah, it's much better to do the only smart thing left to do and blindly lash out a Muslims regardless of creed and denomination.

lol. retard.

>in the Quran?
It's justified in the OG Bible

>If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13

It exists. In decent numbers. It's just absolutely fucking useless.

dubious translation and if you were honest you would admit that it doesn't matter since the hadith which specifically says to put to death homosexuals has the same theological weight as the quran

>Kafirs pretending to know how Shari'ah works
No, actually it doesn't because of it's disputed Sahih status. And even if it was "undeniably" Sahih there are various methodologies that would still leave it up for scrutiny because of it's contradiction with the message of several other Hadith detailing with hudud.

Salafist ragheads would probably disagree. But they aren't exactly people.

see, what you're literally saying is "yes it is justified according to some interpretations of islam but not mine"

>yes it is justified according to some interpretations of islam but not mine
>it is justified according to some interpretations of islam
>it is justified

Saheeh Bukhari is literally at the top of the sihah sittah and is the most authentic and reliable of hadith, they've been acclaimed by Muslim Scholars of Hadith for over a thousand years
but I'm sure you know better

Do all Jews believe that the Jews should not own territory until the arrival of the Messiah? No, those are fringe groups.

Do all Christians believe that some random Ruskie (Vissarion) is Christ reborn?

Likewise, do all Muslims believe in the insane ramblings of an edge lord who called for the murder of Jews, Christians and Shi'a? No of course not. However this ideology (Salafism) is being spread all over the Muslim world and we need to get rid of it the same way someone rids themselves of a tumor or gangrene infested limb.

That however, doesn't mean that the Salafi nonsense is representative of the majority of Muslims or their belief system.

When the Hadith contradicts the Quran the Quran takes precedence. Any scholar worth their weight in shit will tell you that

where do the hadiths about not keeping gays in your house because they are unclean contradict the Quran?

>>yes it is justified according to some interpretations of islam but not mine
>>it is justified according to some interpretations of islam
>>it is justified
>retardation

>Muslims say Fundamentalists aren't Muslims
>"No true scotsman! luel!"
>Muslims acknowledge Fundamentalism problem
>"Look! Dey legitimizing terrorizm"
Not since Goatse have I ever been so shocked to how stretched something can be.

Seriously, are you retarded? What do you want me to do, deny Fundamentalists exist? Fucking idiot.

That's quite different than killing them en masse, isn't it?

no, it is a short step away from it actually

>it says i shouldn't keep gays in my house
>well, my country is basically a big house, maybe this is what it means
>i must deport the gays from my country
>bit hard to do this, so i will kill the gays alhamdulillah i mean some other hadith say that r-right h-heh

Not by the earliest theologians and legalists actually.
Imam Ghazali, Maturidi and Ibn al Arabi contested hundreds of Sahih hadiths.

Seriously, you lot are a real hoot.

>Being this triggered

>slippery slope argument
Just stop.

...

They seem to contradict other Hadith that say you are supposed to not curse a believer for their sins.
Like with the story of the drunken Sahabi. Al Nuayman.

Fuck all this theological nonsense
what do Muslims do
kill fags and try and destroy western society
solution
kill shitskin losers

MUSLIMS GET FUCKED I WILL KILL YOU ALL

Desperate?

Seek professional help

which ones in particular though? it was his mission in life to record ahadeeth so of course the shit ones will get mixed with the good ones

it's called interpretation, something that seems like a bit of a problem for abrahamic religions, especially Islam and Christianity
if you think gays are unclean and shouldn't be kept in your house then why would you keep them in your country? or in the world at all? send them to their judgement sooner, it is a mercy

youtube.com/watch?v=Vev-OzHQy94

>Fuck all these theological facts, I wanna kill sum Mudslimes.

Well, the problem seems to be that "Fundamentalism" seems to be one of the central tenets of Islam.
I mean, the Quran itself is a pure symbol of conservatism, as a basis for social and political rules and also simply as a linguistic basis for Arabic.

And it's supposed to be taken as literally as possible, there are different ways the Muslim world has been trying to get around this, like the different schools of """jurisdiction""" (which really just means exegesis) or investing religious authority in a political figure like the Caliph, but in our current times both of these are basically defunct, so people are left with their Imams and the Internet at most.
Either way though, it's not only easy to take the Quran and the Hadith literally as a guideline for morality, law and so on, it's considered good to do that. Hence why you end up with the rampant Homophobia in the muslim World.

>Fuck all these theological fact thingies. I wanna kill peeple.

it seems pretty clear to me m8, they are unclean, you should not associate with them or keep them in your house
is it not one of the major sins of Islam?

01. Associating anything with Allah
02. Murder
03. Practising magic
04. Not Praying
05. Not paying Zakat
06. Not fasting on a Day of Ramadan without excuse
07. Not performing Hajj, while being able to do so
08. Disrespect to parents
09. Abandoning relatives
10. Fornication and Adultery
11. Homosexuality(sodomy)
12. Interest(Riba)
13. Wrongfully consuming the property of an orphan
14. Lying about Allah and His Messenger
15. Running away from the battlefield
16. A leader's deceiving his people and being unjust to them
17. Pride and arrogance
18. Bearing false witness
19. Drinking Khamr (wine)
20. Gambling
21. Slandering chaste women
22. Stealing from the spoils of war
23. Stealing
24. Highway Robbery
25. Taking false oath
26. Oppression
27. Illegal gain
28. Consuming wealth acquired unlawfully
29. Committing suicide
30. Frequent lying
31. Judging unjustly
32. Giving and Accepting bribes
33. Woman's imitating man and man's imitating woman
34. Being cuckold
35. Marrying a divorced woman in order to make her lawful for the husband
36. Not protecting oneself from urine
37. Showing-off
38. Learning knowledge of the religion for the sake of this world and concealing that knowledge
39. Bertrayal of trust
40. Recounting favours
41. Denying Allah's Decree
42. Listening (to) people's private conversations
43. Carrying tales
44. Cursing
45. Breaking contracts
46. Believing in fortune-tellers and astrologers
47. A woman's bad conduct towards her husband
48. Making statues and pictures
49. Lamenting, wailing, tearing the clothing, and doing other things of this sort when an affliction befalls
50. Treating others unjustly

51. Overbearing conduct toward the wife, the servant, the weak, and animals
52. Offending one's neighbour
53. Offending and abusing Muslims
54. Offending people and having an arrogant attitude toward them
55. Trailing one's garment in pride
56. Men's wearing silk and gold
57. A slave's running away from his master
58. Slaughtering an animal which has been dedicated to anyone other than Allah
59. To knowingly ascribe one's paternity to a father other than one's own
60. Arguing and disputing violently
61. Witholding excess water
62. Giving short weight or measure
63. Feeling secure from Allah's Plan
64. Offending Allah's righteous friends
65. Not praying in congregation but praying alone without an excuse
66. Persistently missing Friday Prayers without any excuse
67. Unsurping the rights of the heir through bequests
68. Deceiving and plotting evil
69. Spying for the enemy of the Muslims
70. Cursing or insulting any of the Companions of Allah's Messenger

>nobus
Delete that shit. It's nobis.

Well. That's the easy way around acknowledging that there are opinions different than the ones you find convenient for your quest to cleanse the West, I suppose.

>killing statists
>not god tier

>it's called interpretation, something that seems like a bit of a problem for abrahamic religions, especially Islam and Christianity
>if you think gays are unclean and shouldn't be kept in your house then why would you keep them in your country? or in the world at all? send them to their judgement sooner, it is a mercy
Interpretation =/= slippery slope

You clearly don't know about the intricacies of theology, attributing muh slippery slope as an argument against organized religion is telling of that fact. Please stop offering your ill-informed opinion on the subject.

The death of radicalism is thought. When Muslims realize what the crazies on the pulpit are saying is contradictory to their religion rather than exemplary, it will be the death of radicalism. However, what will foster radicalism is this silly us vs. them mentality you and so many others seem to be harboring.