and it's not even new, it's just the different wording of old shit

Wittgenstein is overrated as shit

'Its just words bro'

What exactly do they do with anlalytic philosophy

basically this

it was funny when they yelled at continentals to stop saying things that weren't grammatically correct

"you can't use the words like that"

Wittgenstein wasn't even that bad

they still all wank over him so he is in that respect

@Pseudo-Analysist look who it is

@Punished Elías yo

Analytic philosophy can really range from really bad to actually kind of useful

So I read some of the Quran. There are truly drastic differences from Christianity and Islam.

Christianity preaches of a loving merciful God.
Islam preaches of a stringent merciless Allah.

more at 11

>Islam is a religion of evil
Jews: Am I a joke to you

IDK if I’d call it evil, because we’re kinda thinking like progressives judging it through that lens, but incompatible with Christianity, yes.

Subjective, a Muslim wouldn’t believe that, but it’s definitely incompatible with Christianity. The two don’t go together well.

Anthony says it's evil because if it became dominant he'd never be allowed to watch Aniki gachimuchis legally

didn't you praise islamic terror attacks as part of an incel uprising

you say it like it's a good thing

Islam is incompatible with Christianity not only on the level of theistic interpretation of God but also on a fact that modern christians are pretty much pagans for them (not that they are necessarily wrong in this regard considering how many leftovers of paganism are in modern Christian Europe).

I wouldn't even say that Christians are pagans from a muslim point of view.

We simply view eachother as different sects that reject an authority.

We reject Muhammed, they reject the divinity (although they revere) of Christ.

Do they actually revere him? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Muslim even talk about Jesus

They do, they call him a "Prophect". They reject the notion of him being divine.

^

I've asked many Muslims about this.

They understand him as the savior of the Jews, knowing that the jews rejected him.

Unfortunately, what they do is make up things he said in the Hadith.

They reject the OT and NT ofc, both would destroy the Quran if actually read.

^

```"“[Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom... Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.”```

Islam is a direct copy of Judism and Christanity.

This is Aquinas' take on Islam.

^

```Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness```

This is from the nitpicking moslems like to do of the OT proclaiming that Mohammed was the messiah to be

Ofc, none of that holds weight when you look at Jesus vs. Muhammed.

There's a clear winner and fulfiller there