Francis recently stated that, "authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence...":

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/08/isis-...race-islam

It seems to me that Francis is trying to do with Islam something that has been slowly done with Catholicism over the last 200 years, that is, divorce (no  pun intended) the religion from its historical roots.  Now, if the Jihadists are convinced by people like Francis, should historians be "convinced", also?  If one simply looks at the timeline of World history, it is clear that Islam has been a violent religion since its very earliest days, from its initial crusades after the death of Mohamed until being checked at the Battle of Tours, and after that, the continued and attempted conquest of the West until the Fall of Constantinople in 1453.

Are people like Francis a threat to the Enlightenment with their revisionist histories?  Is Francis' recent statement about the Quran equivalent to Holocaust denial?

He's just a fucking moron.

(August 13, 2016 at 3:44 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: He's just a fucking moron.

Being an ex-Catholic, I would agree.  Religion is moronic, but as with the creationists trying to undermine all of modern biology and genetics, will people like Francis succeed in undermining the study of history?  To say that Mohamed did not preach violence is to say that Jefferson did not preach liberty; to me, Francis' statement is revisionist history at its worst.  What price will the World pay for such nonsense, even if the Muslim fanatics become convinced that the religion is "authentically peaceful"?

Theists have always been a threat to the Enlightenment because they substitute bullshit for reason.

Remember, Pope Fuckface believes in the fucking devil!

https://churchpop.com/2014/10/07/13-pope...foe-devil/

Quote:13 Warnings from Pope Francis on Man’s Oldest Foe, the Devil

So many people like him because he's not anywhere as bad as the previous pope. I look at him and I see how he's still making life worse for millions of people. Fuck the pope.

He's neither completely right nor wrong. A proper reading of the Qur'an suggests that Islam promotes violence (but so does the Bible) but not to the extent promoted by terrorist groups like ISIS.

(August 13, 2016 at 3:56 pm)Jesster Wrote: So many people like him because he's not anywhere as bad as the previous pope. I look at him and I see how he's still making life worse for millions of people. Fuck the pope.

Boru

I keep reading this as Dope Francis.

(August 13, 2016 at 4:40 pm)Irrational Wrote: He's neither completely right nor wrong. A proper reading of the Qur'an suggests that Islam promotes violence (but so does the Bible) but not to the extent promoted by terrorist groups like ISIS.

Yes, I agree, the Bible does promote violence.

(August 13, 2016 at 3:42 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Francis recently stated that, "authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence...":

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/08/isis-...race-islam

It seems to me that Francis is trying to do with Islam something that has been slowly done with Catholicism over the last 200 years, that is, divorce (no  pun intended) the religion from its historical roots.  Now, if the Jihadists are convinced by people like Francis, should historians be "convinced", also?  If one simply looks at the timeline of World history, it is clear that Islam has been a violent religion since its very earliest days, from its initial crusades after the death of Mohamed until being checked at the Battle of Tours, and after that, the continued and attempted conquest of the West until the Fall of Constantinople in 1453.

Are people like Francis a threat to the Enlightenment with their revisionist histories?  Is Francis' recent statement about the Quran equivalent to Holocaust denial?

What Francis is doing is no different that what has been done in the US. Concerning the subject of slavery and the oppression of black people. From the deletion of the roles prominate black men have played in America's history, The nature and life of slavery, to the reason the civil war was fought, to the civil rights movement to today's feign for 'justice'. But rather than incite racial/religious tension He is trying to diffuse it.

Where is the problem in that?