Really interesting that article from Guardian, like "Muslims were most often the subject of negative attitudes held by other faith groups, but were also the group most likely to hold negative attitudes towards people of other religions."

You understand this study is talking about you and me as well, right?

Problem is that's not exactly what the study is saying. You're using all the wrong words again.

Religion is the greatest divider of humanity and is a bigger cause of prejudice than race. I politely ask theists to re-consider their loyalty to bigotry. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/n...ays-report

I think it depends which hand you use?

@Fake Messiah Very probably. Since Muslims absolutely regard the desecration of the Quran as a sin, Christians doing so would would seem to violate Jesus' stricture to 'do as you would be done by. Ignoring Jesus's command to love your neighbour in order to wipe your bum with pages from a Quran would likely qualify as a sin.

Seriously, is it a sin in Christianity to wipe your ass with the pages from Quran?

Its irrelevant what your book says. I dont have to be able to understand arabic. What is relevant: That you can DEMONSTRATE that, whatever your book says, mathches iwth observable reality. You have DEMONSTRATED over and over, that you dont have the tools and methodology to do so. Ergo: Stop telling us what your book says, but start to look for a method to DEMONSTRATE whatever it calims is true. Saying "oh, look the Quras tells us x and my interpretation is y" is NOT such a reliable method. Your last thread about the sun swlaaoing the Moon is just another example in along chain of proofs that you have absolutely NO understandin gabout how to DEMONSTRATE to others what you think is true.

So - again - if your standard is that a book should be short and in a not-forgotten, not-translated language, why haven't you learned to read Irish?

But a lot (possibly a majority) of Muslims insist that the Quran can only be read in Arabic, that there's no point reading a translation.

Also the bible is 1200 pages, the Quran is only 600.

A translation would be handy indeed, but a translation is something different than what FM is suggesting

Easier than Arabic, because you wouldn't have to learn a new alphabet.

But if that's the standard you're going to use, you should read the Ulster Cycle in the original. The surviving manuscripts total only about 400 pages. All you'd have to do is learn to read Irish. Easy peasy.

Hebrew and Greek are hardly 'almost forgotten languages.'

It's only 600 pages, only in Arabic with no forgotton languages. Thatis quite easy and simple to read

While the bible is very complicated and long, the Quran is not. While the bible's original text is written in a complicated, almost forgotton language the Quran is not.

Trust your own mind and do your own homework. If you copy the opinions of others you'll lose your own mind and turn into another copy.

Also Southern Christians especially will simultaneously argue that the "word of God" is written for the simple man and not complicated AND that you have to study crap down to the root of the Greek word and know the entire context of every scenario of every command to understand it. It's beyond hilarious.

And yet Islam has how many denominations? You know, where people interpret Quran in all sorts of ways. So don't put the blame on me.