Extremists: a question and a talk

[WinterHold]

The problem, Atlas, is that all of that shit is so poorly written/translated that anyone can find exactly what they want in it.  Xtians do it all the time too, so it is nothing to feel special about.

If the words spoke the meaning themselves, then we don't need extra walls of text to put a justification the eye cannot see. Left is left; and right is right according to language rules; the text should never be taken but raw.

BTW, there was an ancient order of Muslims who believed in exactly this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila

The Quran is 600 pages, you only see a justification for its verses when you present the Hadith books to be companions of the Quran. Suddenly the 600 pages become 2000 or even 20000. And then only cherry picking happens and becomes possible.

---

Do those verses come earlier or later than the violent ones they contradict? Because if it's earlier, then they get overruled by the violent ones.

I don't know. I also explained why I don't buy any history foretold by Islamic sects.

---

But the question asked for the supporters of Jihadi movements: don't you feel shame of going against obvious, clear verses from your own religion, like the ones above?

Do children and suicide bombing casualties know in what they were killed or because of what?

You're so full of shit.  The Quran fully supports religious violence without any twisting or bending.

You're nothing but another dishonest apologist.

?
I brought forth the evidence from the same book you accuse; bring an opposing evidence or bring an opposing evidence.

I'm not full of shit. I pooped recently.