Hypothesis: The Jews continue circumcision because they're building a 75' tall flesh golem of King David in Jerusalem to bring about the End Times.

Giant dick skin golem

Maybe they promote abortion for the same reason

That's dark. Talmudic temple conceptualizes golem as third temple that genocides the goy

So, the bank?

@Catboi yea, tho TIL that golem always turns on its creator.

In the Book of Samuel King David must collect 100 philistine dick skins in order to get married to his wife.

Seems like a weird way to bond with your father in law.

not even the weirdest thing in the Scriptures

You mean you guys didn't give a hundred dick skins at your wedding?

If you count the ones still attached, maybe?

In another part of the Bible a prophet calls a curse on three teenagers teasing him by telling him to become an apostate (essentially by going to another temple and sleeping with temple prostitutes instead of worshipping YHWH) and God agrees and lets three bears come out and eat the the vulgar teens.

Summoning bears on your detractors is a pretty reasonable flex compared to dick collecting for father in law

But conjure animals is a druid spell, not a cleric one 🤔

Pagans confirmed

https://media.tenor.com/images/488c20b730e6ea9af348072f1f5ba63a/tenor.gif

To be fair the old Testament is basically God telling, through the prophets, the Israelites to do this one thing, then the Israelites saying "lawl no", then God punishing the Israelites for disobedience and the prophets laughing in the Israelites faces repeatedly.

Definitely setting the pattern to follow 🙄

Hey, can I ask a question? Not directed at anyone in particular.
People might criticize Islam and say look in the holy books they oppress women and are oppressive and this and that, thus Islam is bad.
But akyhough christianity or Judaism has similarly controversial and regressive stuff in their holy books, it is not framed similarly. You can ignore it and not focus on it
Why is that? Any takers?

You're just talking about the books themselves right?

Not the actual practice that takes place?

lmao

I don't know what it is in Christianity one would consider 'regressive' but even granting that point I really don't care

it's a good thing we don't base our moral frameworks off what the culture considers 'scandalous'

@kujapirate1996 controversial things like?

pretty metal

A lot of Paul's teachings are held up too literally imo. A lot of his recorded remarks are analogies or one off statements that I question the doctrinal validity of.

For instance women being quiet. I doubt that's doctrinal.

Also, who has actually tried to read the Qur'an? I've tried to find English translations that make sense, but the entire structure of how the various passages are made up is just plain confusing.

@kujapirate1996
Lolwut? Islam is right about women.

To know the difference between Christianity and Islam you just have to look at their prophets

Jesus preached tolerance and acceptance
Muhammad said convert to Islam if you want to keep your head

Apparently there were also times when Muhammad preached peace and tolerance. Those times coincide with points where he was weak and/or at the mercy of others, and muslim scholars have ruled that those sections can be ignored in favor of the 'convert or die' parts.

It's Mecca vs Medina. Basically, his rise to power was more peaceful, but when he seized power he became ruthless.

Scholars state that the newer verses supersede any previous versions. It's not a contradiction, but rather a part of "the plan"

@JoJo, Kомик Tell that to @PiusXIII supposed priest who wants to beat people he disagrees with

Huh?

He says Jesus liked to use violence @JoJo, Kомик

What's the evidence?

I mean in all fairness an eternity of conscious torture in fire for anyone that rejects his message seems a tad violent

I don't think Jesus ever said that though
It was mostly his followers saying that

Phew, I was worried for a second there

Lol

Just saying, it doesn't detract from my statement

Wouldn't you say though, that both Jesus and Muhammad, either implicitly or overtly, essentially said that to go against them was to go against God?