Originally Posted by emporershand89
An excellent argument Brother Cato; one I will Rep you on. However I think my point from earlier was less about whether Islam is violent or not; but rather "How" violent it has become.
The modern Qur'an translations have more Blood and Gore inside of them it's frightening. Most of the quotes I posted above are examples of how descriptive, generalized, and open to mass slaughter the Qur'an is. Kill the Fitnah (Non-Believer) it says, and it gives dozens of different ways on how to go about it. While the Bible does have some violent passages, mainly from the Torah (Old Testament) it doesn't openly say take people from their houses and cut out their tongues. Also most acts of violence in the bible are caused by God ("...and God did bring down a heavenly wrath upon his people to punish them for their sins.").
I guess what I'm saying is that if the God of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism wanted peace and worhsiping of him why would he send Muhammad, his Prophet, write a book in such a manner. Islam, through the 3 Holy Books, claims to be about bringing Allah's Peace and Understanding to humanity through Sword and War. The Bible states the same, only encourages Men to be peaceful, and follow the teachings of God and Jesus Christ. "Love thy neighbor," the Bible says, "Fight till all Fitnah is destroyed," says the Qur'an.
I'll put it rather simply, since both books are around the same time period -
If religions didn't change, then modern Christians would be more like the Westbooru Baptist Church - y'know, the guys responsible for "God Hates Fags!", picketing the funerals of war veterans and the attempted protest of San Deigo Comic Con a while back because people had idols other than God (in their mind)? Well as it happens, two of those at least would have been supported by the Bible (specifically, the "smashing" of Idols and the anti-gay semitism). The Westbooru Baptist Church in that sense are a lot like Daleks - anything different is wrong and must be purged. And scarily, that's how pre-revision God pretty much was. Not to mention he probably would have approved of events such as the Crusades, etc, etc. As I hear it, the bible has more than it's fair share of blood and guts as well, too.
It is fortunate then that the WBC is the minority. I like to believe that the same goes for all religions - at least, that the extremists who want to murder your wife and children (and you) are the minority.
I do understand and get what you're saying, but all the information I looked up after finding this suggests that like any other widely consumed media suggests that it's very much ambiguous. One of the big reasons I didn't actually quote Mohammed for example is a lot of his quotes are rather vague. For example:
“I swear by the Almighty that a person who is wounded in the way of Allah – and Allah knows full well who is actually wounded in His way – he would be raised on the Day of Judgement such that his colour be the colour of blood with the fragrance of musk around him”
Which without proper context could mean pretty much anything, especially since the West is now a thing.
To relegate things back to topic a little, yes this does mean those guys trying to blow up Mecca are extremists who are not in line with their faith at all, and I'm sure Allah might have something special for them if they tried to demolish the place. As others have pointed out in this instance, religion does not seem to be their primary motive, even if they are (like other religious extremists) giving their religion a bad name.