How do Muslims reconcile the belief that they posses the True Faith with the generally miserable state of their...

That's not even including all the parts conquered by Christians.

>You mean the rest of the world like the fucking developed countries which are predominantly western and have Christian histories?
Most of the Islamic world is on par with South America in terms of development. It isn't all mud huts in sandy deserts like you think.

Oh wow on par with South America. That's really quite impressive. They're on par with the continent that has been a corrupt, stagnant shithole filled with murder, coups, and dictators for the past two centuries.

That's how it works when your country is very religious.

Theres this concept called a developing country. Not everywhere is the west, areas of the world began to modernise at different times. Only a fool like yourself looks at a nation doing less well and blames their race or religion rather than history and geopolitics

I notice how South Americans failings is blamed on murder, coups and dictators but the middle easts failings are blamed on Islam, not the murders, coups and dictators that fill the regions recent history, not to mention huge fucking foreign invasions...

Did I blame the Muslim world's failing on religion and culture? Please feel free to point out where I did.

They can explain everything with "God knows best" aka "Allahu Akbar"
You just won the lottery?
>Allahu Akbar!
You got home safe and sound today?
>Allahu Akbar!
You're able to provide for your family?
>Allahu Akbar!
Your entire country is consumed by civil war?
>Allahu Akbar!
Best friend just got shot in the head?
>Allahu Akbar!

Basically whatever happens, God intended for it to happen and God also has some epic plan that will turn the horrible thing that just happened into something good in the end.

Resentful /pol/ fantasies about "the decline of the west"

no, there hasn't been any mention of Jewish subversion

Coutries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Brunei and some others are rich as fuck thanks to oil which Allah sent them.
Most of other countries are developing

>bcoz le sykes-picot

>only neo nazis hate muslim filth

I don't get it

Why do western liberals champion a religion which goes against everything they stand for? Islam is explicitly expansionist, exploitive, oppressive, violent, and cruel

And so help me if you mention the crusades or inquisition I'll eat my own beard

t. Singh

Just like liberals give support to Sikh terrorists

Learn to read before you post, dummy

#justice4Dev

Learn to stop being a back pedaling faggot

>How did the cult of pedo seep into Indonesia?
Trade.

>Christian
>Countries
Hardly any christian countries left

>Rich country
>Implying Europe isn't rich and the most avanced part of the World

>State religion
>Christian country

A country is christian if her history and her people is christian,

Its literally the point of the thread

>the present state of a country doesn't matter

Lutheranism is the state religion of finland too

>correctly recognizing Juche as a religion

>Veeky Forums

wat

Isnt orthodox state religion of Russia too? At least the goverment has pretty strong ties to it.

Conspiracy theories are very popular in the muslim world. For example, many Palestinians believe Israelis train sheep and pigs to destroy there crops

Most of these countries are still shitholes rife with unemployment and lack of economic prospects for all aside from the thin elite.

There are people in the Western world who believe in a global Muslim conspiracy involving an unknown but shocking number of Muslims. Although they don't get called 'conspiracy theorists', they get called 'Sam Harris'.

Maybe but my point is about the popularity of them in the muslim world

My point is about the legitimacy of them in the Western world, along with popularity.

You can go on prime time television and rant about the global Muslim conspiracy and people will talk to you like you're making sense. You can bring it up in any pub or cafe and people will talk about it like it's a real thing.

You can't do the same on Western media or in Western social gatherings with other conspiracy theories.

Due to the reasons most Muslims champion their own religion as merely harmoniously expansive, fair, free, peaceful and loving: ignorance of history and scripture.
I have yet to meet a Muslim that knows the Muhammad of history (cruel, violent strongman) as opposed to the Muhammad of folktales (the most perfect man ever). According to them the only violent thing he did was fighting in wars, but how that was perfectly justified and not a single innocent was hurt. No one will ever mention about things like ordering hits on people who merely mocked him or taking girls after murdering their fathers, because they've never heard about these (those who did pretend that they're fabrications, even though the sources that tell of these acts are taken as authoritative for other purposes). Fortunately for most people, including Muslims, things like these are reprehensible. Unfortunately they're not going to face the reality of their faith any time soon. The same applies to those liberals who prostrate themselves in front of Islam at every corner. None of them has any real understanding of the history, doctrines and current status of the religion and just go by blind assumptions, which is something like:
a) Islam cannot endorse violence, because the Buddha and Jesus didn't; the Old Testament doesn't count anymore; and all religions are the same therefore Islam must also be 100% peaceful!
and
b) Islamophobia is virulent, omnipresent and Muslims are being rekt all the time, therefore we must consider every member of the entire community as the same (their affiliations with terrorists or criminal records and the like are to be disregarded) and serve and protect them not in the way we would protect a national ie. by the correct and fair application of the law, but in the special way they want

>a) Islam cannot endorse violence, because the Buddha and Jesus didn't; the Old Testament doesn't count anymore; and all religions are the same therefore Islam must also be 100% peaceful!

People never finish this thought. We all agree the OT is the worst advice of all three major Abrahamic religious texts.

It's things like this that lead people to think that the conflict in the Middle East is primarily, ultimately, or proximately religious. It isn't.

>b) Islamophobia is virulent, omnipresent and Muslims are being rekt all the time, therefore we must consider every member of the entire community as the same (their affiliations with terrorists or criminal records and the like are to be disregarded) and serve and protect them not in the way we would protect a national ie. by the correct and fair application of the law, but in the special way they want

The special way they want, the same as other citizens?

>We all agree the OT is the worst advice of all three major Abrahamic religious texts.
That's a non issue. The fact that it is so shows that the "it's all the same man" argument holds no water, but a lot of people disregard that, or suppose that the bad advice thing cannot apply to Islam.

>the conflict in the Middle East is primarily, ultimately, or proximately religious. It isn't.
Which conflict? There are billions of them even right now. And "religious" in what sense, a conflict between Muslims and others?

>The special way they want, the same as other citizens?
I'm referring to things like the caricature fiascos and certain communities demanding Sharia for themselves.

I think in India it's just places where muslims exist. Anyways the map is not a very good one, Oman is not sunni.

They won the crusades and converted the mongols who attacked them

>Indonesia

Trade. Same for east africa. Islam is very attractive for merchants, amongst other things because the importance of the notion of umma. It's normal for geographically separated but ethnically/culturally close to be in contact with each other which creates a solidarity that makes trade easier (see the jews, the armenians or the chinese in South East Asia). Thanks to the notion of umma Islam creates an artificial "nation" that doesn't require you to be born inside it to become part of the group and enjoy the profits of this solidarity.

>That's a non issue. The fact that it is so shows that the "it's all the same man" argument holds no water, but a lot of people disregard that, or suppose that the bad advice thing cannot apply to Islam.

It's not a non-issue,

>Which conflict? There are billions of them even right now. And "religious" in what sense, a conflict between Muslims and others?

It's a religious conflict for Jews and Christians, it's a land conflict for Muslims.

>I'm referring to things like the caricature fiascos and certain communities demanding Sharia for themselves.

All Muslims live under Sharia. This is like saying that Jewish communities demand to follow the Ten Commandments, and to hold Jewish religious courts, and that this is a bad thing.

So do the economical and political elites of Spain with the Catholic Church (and I'm sure we can say the same about most catholic nations).

>It's not a non-issue,
Why? Agreeing that the OT is shit supports my point. What the agreement is about or whether the OT is good or not is a non-issue IN THE SCOPE OF THIS DISCUSSION. If one part of the Abrahamic trinity is not the equal of the other 2 parts, then one of the remaining 2 might also not be the equal of the other part.

>It's a religious conflict for Jews and Christians, it's a land conflict for Muslims.
Again, what conflict are you talking about? The Middle East has been a shithole of war for an entire century at least.

>All Muslims live under Sharia.
And yet for some reason Muslims in the West are judged by secular law, not Sharia law.
>This is like saying that Jewish communities demand to follow the Ten Commandments, and to hold Jewish religious courts, and that this is a bad thing.
Following the Ten Commandments is not the same thing as ruling mutilation for thieves. Individually following anything is not the same thing as forcing others into that thing.
Jews cannot demand Jewish religious courts (at least not outside Israel) because secular nations have secular courts which the Jews and everybody else must submit to.

What present state ? Europe is 73% christian.

>Why? Agreeing that the OT is shit supports my point. What the agreement is about or whether the OT is good or not is a non-issue IN THE SCOPE OF THIS DISCUSSION. If one part of the Abrahamic trinity is not the equal of the other 2 parts, then one of the remaining 2 might also not be the equal of the other part.

So what is the difference? The OT is the worst of the three bibles, but Jews take it least seriously? The Koran is the middle one, and Muslims take it seriously.

>Again, what conflict are you talking about? The Middle East has been a shithole of war for an entire century at least.

The century during which Christians and Jews invaded and colonized the region was more violent than the century that preceded it? WOW.

>And yet for some reason Muslims in the West are judged by secular law, not Sharia law.

Of course. Everyone is subject to secular law. Religious people are subject to their religious law.

>Following the Ten Commandments is not the same thing as ruling mutilation for thieves. Individually following anything is not the same thing as forcing others into that thing.

Yes it is. It's following a religious commandment with that as the justification, it's a religious commandment.

>Jews cannot demand Jewish religious courts (at least not outside Israel) because secular nations have secular courts which the Jews and everybody else must submit to.

Jews have Jewish religious courts everywhere in the world that they live.

>cult of pedo seep
As accurate as pic related.

>How do they cope with the desire to live in the West?

I will never understood that.

If you are a Muslim, go back to Saudi Arabia.

>So what is the difference? The OT is the worst of the three bibles, but Jews take it least seriously? The Koran is the middle one, and Muslims take it seriously.
This has got nothing whatsoever to do with anything I said. Good job.
>The century during which Christians and Jews invaded and colonized the region was more violent than the century that preceded it? WOW.
Put the goalposts down. We're not talking about why the Mid East is a terrible place. We're talking about that mysterious conflict you brought up but failed to name.
>Of course. Everyone is subject to secular law. Religious people are subject to their religious law.
Not unless you can apply that law. Or do you mean in the sense that your God will sort you out in accordance to the requisites of the religion after you die? That still doesn't mean that Western Muslims live under Sharia, because they don't. They can't legally judge people via Sharia.
>Yes it is. It's following a religious commandment with that as the justification, it's a religious commandment.
What is? Following the TC for oneself or imposing religious laws to other people?
A Muslim thief can mutilate himself or ask someone to do it as punishment fit under Sharia. That's his liberty. But Muslims living in a secular state cannot demand what they follow to be applied to everyone, no matter what their justification is.
>Jews have Jewish religious courts everywhere in the world that they live.
[citation needed]

Question(s) for anyone who might know an answer:
What was the predominate school of Muslim jurisprudence under the Ottoman Caliphate? Under Abbasids? And finally, which of the historical schools, dead or living, can be said to be most ""liberal"" within the Sunni tradition? Jariri seems fairly relaxed but it's hard to find any kind of accurate information; I actually have a degree closely related to religion but most of what I can find on these particular topics are too specialized for me.

>Jews have Jewish religious courts everywhere in the world that they live.

Nope, they don't. Unless you mean something alike non-binding arbitration that is not enforceable by state authorities.

>This has got nothing whatsoever to do with anything I said. Good job.

Then you'll have to be clearer when you speak.

>Put the goalposts down. We're not talking about why the Mid East is a terrible place. We're talking about that mysterious conflict you brought up but failed to name.

You just were talking about why it's a terrible place.

>Not unless you can apply that law. Or do you mean in the sense that your God will sort you out in accordance to the requisites of the religion after you die? That still doesn't mean that Western Muslims live under Sharia, because they don't. They can't legally judge people via Sharia.

The 'mysterious conflict' is centred on Israel and Palestine; for Israeli Jews, it's religious, for Palestinians, it's about land.

>Not unless you can apply that law. Or do you mean in the sense that your God will sort you out in accordance to the requisites of the religion after you die? That still doesn't mean that Western Muslims live under Sharia, because they don't. They can't legally judge people via Sharia.

That's secular law. Western Muslims live under the secular law of the country they live in, and they live under Sharia. It's no different than Jews or Christians being expected to follow their religious laws, even if the secular law does not require it.

>What is? Following the TC for oneself or imposing religious laws to other people?

Following them for themselves, of course.

>A Muslim thief can mutilate himself or ask someone to do it as punishment fit under Sharia. That's his liberty. But Muslims living in a secular state cannot demand what they follow to be applied to everyone, no matter what their justification is.

They don't and they won't.

>[citation needed]

You can use a search engine, yes?

'Beth Din'.

I really wish India would have been fully islamized, I'm not even Muslim I just think Hinduism is trash

Ethiopia, most of India, most of Kenya, Eritrea, most of Nigeria... All Muslim, LOL.

>Nope, they don't. Unless you mean something alike non-binding arbitration that is not enforceable by state authorities.

Yes, there is a Jewish religious court practice with the same powers as a Sharia court. Neither is binding by state authorities. Only one is considered to be part of a global conspiracy to kill westerners.

Dont know for Sunni, but Shias expect their lives to be as shitty as possible, as it's a test by God. Only those that managed to slog through the hellishness of life get to enter the kingdom of God (which cant exist on earth and fuck Khomeini for fucking up centuries of Shia doctrine).

What did Khomeini fuck up?

Doesn't help Khomeini's weird quasi-mystical doctrinal inclinations were propped up by the West for a decade.

>Then you'll have to be clearer when you speak.
No, you will have to learn to read.
>You just were talking about why it's a terrible place.
Nope.
>The 'mysterious conflict' is centred on Israel and Palestine; for Israeli Jews, it's religious, for Palestinians, it's about land.
Right, finally we got a name. And yeah, this is the case. How does it relate to what I said about mistaken assumptions again?
>That's secular law. Western Muslims live under the secular law of the country they live in, and they live under Sharia. It's no different than Jews or Christians being expected to follow their religious laws, even if the secular law does not require it.
Religious laws as in observances =! religious laws as in actual laws to be used for settling justice.
>Following them for themselves, of course.
Then why did you quote "Following the Ten Commandments is not the same thing as ruling mutilation for thieves." and "Individually following anything is not the same thing as forcing others into that thing.", 2 sentences built upon contrasting 2 opposites, and said that "it's the same because it's about following religious commandments due to religion"? Did you get confused or did you just wanted to write something even if it was stupid?
>'Beth Din'.
>same powers as a Sharia court.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I'm done. It's a waste of time to """argue""" with someone that doesn't even put forth arguments but just makes passive-aggressive circular comments that go nowhere and tries to move the goalposts constantly.

That map is literal shit. Islam doesn't span even half of what is shown in that map.

No it's about right but the numbers of muslims in an area required to colour it green is extremely low it seems.

>Right, finally we got a name. And yeah, this is the case. How does it relate to what I said about mistaken assumptions again?

Most people mistakenly assume it's a religious conflict; but it's only religious in nature for Jews and Christians, for Muslims, it's defending their homes.

>Religious laws as in observances =! religious laws as in actual laws to be used for settling justice.

It is when your religion demands it, as with Jews and Muslims.

>Then why did you quote "Following the Ten Commandments is not the same thing as ruling mutilation for thieves." and "Individually following anything is not the same thing as forcing others into that thing.", 2 sentences built upon contrasting 2 opposites, and said that "it's the same because it's about following religious commandments due to religion"? Did you get confused or did you just wanted to write something even if it was stupid?

They're both justified in the same way. Following the Ten Commandments as written would be about as horrific to us as dismembering thieves. You should read the real Ten Commandments some time. Most people only know one version.

>AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sharia courts have the same secular power as a Beth Din.

Basically Shia's lost against the Sunnis early on and have been an often persecuted minority ever since. So they concluded that God is putting them on a test and only the virtue of an individual and his faith can bring him to the kingdom of God. This is the reward for getting through life by living by the Shia creed.
So unlike the Sunnis, the Shia (talking in generalisations) never bothered to build empires and their clergy didn't interfere in politics but instead lived in secluded communities searching for guidance on how to live good lives as taught by the Quran.
Then there were some uprisings in the early 20th century with the clergy becoming more and more politicaly involved, which finally resulted in Khomeini and the Islamic Republic.

Is Albania counted as Christian?

500 years of Ottoman rule and conversion, but Christian prior to that.

The ones I know are white, hard working and civilized. I've never asked them about religion but it doesn't seem to impact them in any way really.

Albanians aren't religious at all. Courtesy of Enver Hoxha.

They blame it on the West and the Jews.

The tree of the communism in one state anti-revisionist doctrine gotta be littered with the blood of agitator reactionary religions.
t. Hoxha

Not sure but I think the Christians and Muslims even had a common underground system for smuggling in religious material in the harshest years of Hoxhaism.

And they are correct. We know this, if it weren't for Jews we would *all* be living a paradisiacal life.

So it seems, because only one third of Ethiopians, 10% of Kenyans, 15% of Indians, 36-48% of Eritreans and 30-40% of Tanzanians are muslim.

How Christians reconcile the belief that they possess the True Faith with the generally miserable state of their countries? Latin America, Africa, etc.

Modern, secular western nations don't count considering most people living there are atheistic/agnostic

Pfffft, Europe is at its least Christian state in milennia. Don't lump us all in with that shit

I know you are trolling, but actually more religious regions of Europe are generally well off. Bavaria for example. Poland also is developing at astonishing rate. There's nothing inherent in Christianity that hinders progress.

by realizing political events and life in general have nothing to do with faith.

There are tons of good people suffering, and bad people who are living glorious lives, and vice versa. This life isn't about rewards.

Right, Muslims who know their own history, religious, and culture are wrong, while some fag on Veeky Forums knows exactly what's going on.

Why is it retards like you hold Muslims to this absurdly high standard? Muslims are still human. They are still flawed. What, because a "legitimate" army isn't backing their massacres, it's terrorism, but when white people do it, it's for glory?

It took the threat of nuclear war to get white people to stop killing everything. The closest the Muslims got to being like secular or Christian empires and their evils is when the Ottoman Empire tried acting like the French.

You also make all these claims, site no sources, and ignore the fact that war is shitty. Muhammad was up against pagans who wanted to exterminate all Muslims.

but, then again, this board doesn't have the most well read people.

but that's the least Muslim country in the world.

The rise of communism and nationalism were less religious. and those eras caused WWI, WWII and the cold war.

That's depend on how you define "christian state". The population is definitely less religious now, but not the way in which the government is governed. Europe's ruling parties are now either Christian democratic or non-Marxist socialists. Both of these movements have strong roots in Christian ideology and doctrine.

Compare that to the previous century when you had a mix of Marxists, fascists and nationalists, all of whom were indifferent or even hostile to Christianity which they saw as obstacle to their goals.

I'm no expert on the subject and I can't give an awnser that is not based simply around experience. But in my experience the different schools are not very relevant for the acts of the majority of muslims, most even amongst the zealous have a very basic grasp of islam more based around tradition and culture than scholarly works.

>So unlike the Sunnis, the Shia (talking in generalisations) never bothered to build empires and their clergy didn't interfere in politics but instead lived in secluded communities searching for guidance on how to live good lives as taught by the Quran.

But the Safavi dynasty was founded by the leader of a shia religious sect and the shia clergy was pretty powerful under the Qajars.

>Both of these movements have strong roots in Christian ideology and doctrine.

Then why do no parties in Europe stress the importance of preparation in light of the coming End Times?

why do most muslims think apostasy should be punished with death?

End Times bullshit is a belief typical for Christian Fundamentalism which appeared in America and is completely irrelevant in Europe.

Why do atheists think material wealth and earthly power corresponds with the truth of ones faith or to a blessing from God? The world is worthless and dead.

I say this as a christian.

You can't prepare. It will come and the powers that be are instrumental in bringing about the end times, see the spiritual decay and the great whore of Rome.
Stop posting.

>Stop posting.

Wat?

Yeah, whoever gave them that idea?

That would be John Calvin.

I think catholics are mislead by demons and that their clergy and theologians are actualy satan worshipers.
Ah, right. I tend to forget how significant Calvinism was to the United States.

>I think catholics are mislead by demons and that their clergy and theologians are actualy satan worshipers.

You are absolutely deluded then.

Their wealth and power works against them in this respect.

It is also the only response to denominationalism, one denomination must necessarily be influenced demonically. I of course don't believe mine is.

>Saint Augustine literally argues to not associate worldly power and wealth with validity of Christianity
>1500ish years later cathoshits display their obnoxiousness to prove their religion as true

read city of god.

Yeah that's why I said generalizations. Of course I can't resume an entire religion in a 400 words post.

Well you were talking about Khomeini,an iranian, and I'll say that those two examples resume better the recent history of religion in his country than saying "they never bothered to build empires and their clergy didn't interfere in politics". It's also worth nothing that we're talking about the most relevant shia nation.

The same way Christians and Jews do when things are shitty for them, God is punishing us for our sins.

>forget how significant Calvinism was to the United States.
Isn't he the one who said usury is permitted for Christians?