Discussion so what makes a religion brown

it's always thrown out there that islam is somehow a "brown" religion but what makes a religion "brown"? if it's the majority of the people who practice the religion then christianity is brown too since most of them are either africans or hispanics o algo
does this mean that the most important people of said religions means that a religion is brown? muhammed (pbuh) wasn't brown as there is multiple hadiths that suggest he had white skin and in christianitys case modern depictions of jesus show him as white with brown hair
holy seetherald
 
holy seetherald
>gets triggered by this knowing he doesn't have an argument
>somehow i am the one seething
b863fb3cb615d0bcc99c33d11937836941eda3a0c7e1c747855d755952badcd0.jpg
 
it's always thrown out there that islam is somehow a "brown" religion but what makes a religion "brown"? if it's the majority of the people who practice the religion then christianity is brown too since most of them are either africans or hispanics o algo
does this mean that the most important people of said religions means that a religion is brown? muhammed (pbuh) wasn't brown as there is multiple hadiths that suggest he had white skin and in christianitys case modern depictions of jesus show him as white with brown hair
It depends on what is characteristic of the religion. with christianity you have it's history dominated by central and western europe, and that affected the disposition of the church and the evolution of it's many philosophies and sects, whereas with islam you have shitskin rape apes that love slavery and fucking kids
 
it's always thrown out there that islam is somehow a "brown" religion but what makes a religion "brown"? if it's the majority of the people who practice the religion then christianity is brown too since most of them are either africans or hispanics o algo
does this mean that the most important people of said religions means that a religion is brown? muhammed (pbuh) wasn't brown as there is multiple hadiths that suggest he had white skin and in christianitys case modern depictions of jesus show him as white with brown hair
Amerimutts made up the word white. If a religion doesn’t come from Europe it’s safe to say it’s not European
 
christians owned slaves and since when did muslims fuck kids? do you have anything to say that isn't backed up by pure seethe?
slavery in europe was never under the jurisdiction of and explicitly condoned by the religious authority, and it never played a role in the social structure of europe, they had a fuedal system for a millennia which is an entirely different thing. The history of slavery with respect to europe is just merchant companies buying slaves and working them on foreign cash crops. This is very different than having six of the largest slaves trades in history localised all within mediterranean islamic states who's conduct was explicitly endorsed by islamic law and was inherent to the social structure of those states (i.e. algiers, tunis, cordoba, ottoman empire and mamluks especially). Theres more nuance to the topic than just the presence of slaves somewhere at some point in time in a given region. It's a part of that difference between how the systems of slavery were integrated with the broader structure and legal system, with europeans as I said they barely existed IN europe, and were completely unregulated by the civil and religious authorities, whereas in islamic states you had servant slaves, sex slaves (many of which were children inshallah), labour slaves, slave soldiers, virtually every sector of society involved slavery and it was all regulated under a framework of islamic law. It's a challenge to find a modern sheikh or 'scholar' that would actually condemn slavery of non-muslims for this reason, islam is a slave culture, and much like with their prophet being a pedophile, they tend to double-down rather than reform
 
slavery in europe was never under the jurisdiction of and explicitly condoned by the religious authority, and it never played a role in the social structure of europe, they had a fuedal system for a millennia which is an entirely different thing. The history of slavery with respect to europe is just merchant companies buying slaves and working them on foreign cash crops. This is very different than having six of the largest slaves trades in history localised all within mediterranean islamic states who's conduct was explicitly endorsed by islamic law and was inherent to the social structure of those states (i.e. algiers, tunis, cordoba, ottoman empire and mamluks especially). Theres more nuance to the topic than just the presence of slaves somewhere at some point in time in a given region. It's a part of that difference between how the systems of slavery were integrated with the broader structure and legal system, with europeans as I said they barely existed IN europe, and were completely unregulated by the civil and religious authorities, whereas in islamic states you had servant slaves, sex slaves (many of which were children inshallah), labour slaves, slave soldiers, virtually every sector of society involved slavery and it was all regulated under a framework of islamic law. It's a challenge to find a modern sheikh or 'scholar' that would actually condemn slavery of non-muslims for this reason, islam is a slave culture, and much like with their prophet being a pedophile, they tend to double-down rather than reform
how does this even translate to being brown o algo
 
Back
Top