Does Islam promote violence?

[Skylar]

A guy who knows what he's talking about. If you want to make sense of what's going on, watch this video.

Does Islam promote violence? No, Islam is a religion, it's the people who promote violence. Some parts of Islam are violent, he explains that Buddhists in Nepal are going around slaughtering people, does Buddhism promote violence then?

I'd add that there are more Muslims now who are committing acts of violence in response to what the US has been doing, especially over the last 12 years.

The terrorist have twisted the Koran and their religion to say whatever they want it to say and be whatever they want it to be.

Religion per se don't promote violence but if you have ever read the bible its full of violence as is the Koran.

I agree its a matter of interpertation. If you want to hurt people, you'll find justification for it in your religion. Mother Teresa and Tomas de Torquemada used the same Bible. So we might be looking in the wrong place. Is this a product of Islam? Or a product of Arab culture. Or a product of what's happening n the regions that generate such extremists?

Or a none of the above.

Learn some history------Torquemada was a product of the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE-------Mother Teresa was a product of a very reformed version of the catholic church.

The Holy Roman Empire was largely a German and Austrian creature. By the age of Torquemada's inquisition, it was often called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. The Holy Roman Empire had actually lost many of its Italian holdings in this same era with the Vatican fighting and largely winning practical autonomy from the Empire before the inquisition.

While Spain would eventually come into the orbit of the Holy Roman Empire, it wasn't until Torquemada was long dead (Isabella's grandson was actually Holy Roman Emperor). And Spain never became territorial part of the Empire.

The inquisition was the product of the Spanish response to reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors. It was used to purge the Moorish influence, shore up the authority of the 'Catholic Monarchs' of Isabella and Ferdinand, and to ensure orthodoxy among converted Jews and Muslims. It has next to nothing to do with the 'Holy Roman Empire'.

Not only are you wrong, your entire point is moot. As the same Bible was used to justify both the Spanish Inquisition and the soup kitchens of Mother Terasa. The difference.....was the interpretation and motive. With the religion interpreted to match the agendas and beliefs of the individuals interpreting it.

Which is my entire point.

Islamic violence is-----in accordance with Islamic ideology----no doubt a
kind of syncresis of theological thought BROUGHT to arabia by persons interested in the SILK ROAD and the indigenous population and culture of arabia. That syncretic ideology follows wherever islam "went" Throat slitting of "non-believers" was introduced to south east asia thru Islamic ideology

The natives of Peru, the Caribbean, Mexico and central America weren't met with snuggles and unicorn kisses from Christianity either. With Christian doctrine adapted to justify the actions taken there.

Which again, demonstrates my point.

You are very confused-------you seem to be focusing on the fact that what had been
the HOLY ROMAN empire including the Iberian Penninsula------eventually became
focused MORE on the AUSTRIAN HUNGARIAN EMPIRE-----but actually STILL included---not only the Iberian Peninsula but even the British Isles and France.

No, it didn't. This was the Holy Roman Empire:

It was also called the 'Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation' for a reason. As it was overwhelmingly Germanic and Czech. It didn't include Spain. And I defy you to show us a single credible source that indicates as much.

Worse, you're wrong twice. Those closest that Spain ever came to being part of the Holy Roman empire was under Emperor Charles V.....the grandson of Isabella and Ferdinand. He was king of Spain AND the Holy Roman Emperor. But Spain still wasn't part of the HRE. They simply had the same sovereign during his reign. And Charles V wasn't even born until years after Torquemada was already dead.

Meaning that your time line doesn't work, even by the most wildly accommodating interpretations of the HRE . And your history is off.

Torquemada's actions had virtually nothing to do with the "Holy Roman Empire'. And everything to do with enforcing orthodox Catholicism in the recently reconquered Iberian peninsula.

And again, its moot. As even your inaccurate scenario proves my point: Religion being interpreted to commit violence by those who want to commit violence.

SPAIN did not invent the INQUISITION. It was a machination of rome----and
the POPE. Isabella was simply a big ENTHUSIAST, Pious lady that she was
she facilitated its increasingly barbaric manifestations -----that's all--------sorta like
in manner of an HYSTERICALLY RELIGIOUS slut.

A devoutly religious woman who interpreted her religion to justify violence.

Again, proving my point perfectly.

You have demonstrated the fact that you are slightly befuddled--South America
was HARD HIT by the SPANISH interpretation of the beauty of the INQUISITION-
but the inquisition itself was OF ROME although ROME itself never did it so GOOD as did Spain

The Spanish Catholic interpretation of the Catholic Inquisition, authorized by the Catholic Church?

You do realize you just proved my point a third time, right?

 

[irosie91]

He never left the Church. That's bullshit.

The Nazis and the Pope were quite comfortable.

View attachment 54984

You're wrong...but that's nothing new

adolf never formerly declared himself "not catholic" nor was he excommunicated. Magda Goebbels was ------kinda pious. I would
agree that Adolf did not really consider himself a catholic-----Pius did not
excommunicate him for POLITICAL REASONS

In the Nazi party religion was secondary, above all loyalty to party was mandatory. The Nazis never aligned themselves with any religion.

not entirely true-------the Nazi party claimed itself to be "Christian" although
it is clear they really preferred THOR

The Nazi party claimed anything to promote the party. They never aligned with any religion. That's just fact

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

 

[NoNukes]

A guy who knows what he's talking about. If you want to make sense of what's going on, watch this video.

Does Islam promote violence? No, Islam is a religion, it's the people who promote violence. Some parts of Islam are violent, he explains that Buddhists in Nepal are going around slaughtering people, does Buddhism promote violence then?

I'd add that there are more Muslims now who are committing acts of violence in response to what the US has been doing, especially over the last 12 years.

Revisionist bullshit
It has been violent since its inception. It was BUILT on violence.
Muslims have been doing this shit since it started. Especially to themselves.
BTW, concerning Buddhists : "kings of righteousness".

So has Christianity. So what?

Violence is a HUMAN trait. Just because there has been violence among people who are Muslims since their first day, doesn't mean Islam is inherently violent.

Christians invaded Iraq and fucked up the post war period. Did Christians go and condemn this en masse?

You are a goddamn fool if you try and compare any religion to Islam, present day. Christianity "grew up". The barbaric ME'ers haven't.
Islam is violent, period. You are also a goddamn fool if you deny the OBVIOUS. Violence is ALL OVER their "holy" book. Those people that are violent are just following their book. Maybe one day they will start cherry picking like Christianity did.

Look at the Christian President who invaded Iraq.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your enemies are the ones who try to hurt you. All of Islam is not trying to hurt the Christian world, and all of Christianity is not doing the same either.

The outliers are the cause, and to brush them all with the same irosie sauce is stupid.

Jake lies again------at no time did I suggest that ALL MUSLIMS are out to slit throats--------however anyone who imagines that ----institutional islam is actually friendly towards----
Christians, hindus, jews , Buddhists or Klingons-----IN GENERAL in any land has
never interacted with muslims or visited mosques. I wonder what "ALL OF ISLAM"
means

composition fallacy and ad hom attack

At no time did I say anything of the sort, irosie.

Institutional Christianity is does not look on Muslims as it does believers, either.

I am asking context and nuance from you.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You're wrong...but that's nothing new

adolf never formerly declared himself "not catholic" nor was he excommunicated. Magda Goebbels was ------kinda pious. I would
agree that Adolf did not really consider himself a catholic-----Pius did not
excommunicate him for POLITICAL REASONS

In the Nazi party religion was secondary, above all loyalty to party was mandatory. The Nazis never aligned themselves with any religion.

not entirely true-------the Nazi party claimed itself to be "Christian" although
it is clear they really preferred THOR

The Nazi party claimed anything to promote the party. They never aligned with any religion. That's just fact

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

The Nazis were huge on slogans. You may as well give up, I've studied WWII and the Nazi party for years. The party was paramount and they used any means necessary to promote the party

 

[JakeStarkey]

View attachment 54975
A typical "Modern Day" Christian. How soon they forget.

You'd be wise to study history, Hitler left the Church and the Nazis considered the party their religion. Party first over all things

Many of the institutional Christian churches operating in Germany supported the Nazi Party and Hitler, lgs.

 

[irosie91]

The terrorist have twisted the Koran and their religion to say whatever they want it to say and be whatever they want it to be.

Religion per se don't promote violence but if you have ever read the bible its full of violence as is the Koran.

I agree its a matter of interpertation. If you want to hurt people, you'll find justification for it in your religion. Mother Teresa and Tomas de Torquemada used the same Bible. So we might be looking in the wrong place. Is this a product of Islam? Or a product of Arab culture. Or a product of what's happening n the regions that generate such extremists?

Or a none of the above.

Learn some history------Torquemada was a product of the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE-------Mother Teresa was a product of a very reformed version of the catholic church.

The Holy Roman Empire was largely a German and Austrian creature. By the age of Torquemada's inquisition, it was often called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. The Holy Roman Empire had actually lost many of its Italian holdings in this same era with the Vatican fighting and largely winning practical autonomy from the Empire before the inquisition.

While Spain would eventually come into the orbit of the Holy Roman Empire, it wasn't until Torquemada was long dead (Isabella's grandson was actually Holy Roman Emperor). And Spain never became territorial part of the Empire.

The inquisition was the product of the Spanish response to reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors. It was used to purge the Moorish influence, shore up the authority of the 'Catholic Monarchs' of Isabella and Ferdinand, and to ensure orthodoxy among converted Jews and Muslims. It has next to nothing to do with the 'Holy Roman Empire'.

Not only are you wrong, your entire point is moot. As the same Bible was used to justify both the Spanish Inquisition and the soup kitchens of Mother Terasa. The difference.....was the interpretation and motive. With the religion interpreted to match the agendas and beliefs of the individuals interpreting it.

Which is my entire point.

Islamic violence is-----in accordance with Islamic ideology----no doubt a
kind of syncresis of theological thought BROUGHT to arabia by persons interested in the SILK ROAD and the indigenous population and culture of arabia. That syncretic ideology follows wherever islam "went" Throat slitting of "non-believers" was introduced to south east asia thru Islamic ideology

The natives of Peru, the Caribbean, Mexico and central America weren't met with snuggles and unicorn kisses from Christianity either. With Christian doctrine adapted to justify the actions taken there.

Which again, demonstrates my point.

You are very confused-------you seem to be focusing on the fact that what had been
the HOLY ROMAN empire including the Iberian Penninsula------eventually became
focused MORE on the AUSTRIAN HUNGARIAN EMPIRE-----but actually STILL included---not only the Iberian Peninsula but even the British Isles and France.

No, it didn't. This was the Holy Roman Empire:

It was also called the 'Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation' for a reason. As it was overwhelmingly Germanic and Czech. It didn't include Spain. And I defy you to show us a single credible source that indicates as much.

Worse, you're wrong twice. Those closest that Spain ever came to being part of the Holy Roman empire was under Emperor Charles V.....the grandson of Isabella and Ferdinand. He was king of Spain AND the Holy Roman Emperor. But Spain still wasn't part of the HRE. They simply had the same sovereign during his reign. And Charles V wasn't even born until years after Torquemada was already dead.

Meaning that your time line doesn't work, even by the most wildly accommodating interpretations of the HRE . And your history is off.

Torquemada's actions had virtually nothing to do with the "Holy Roman Empire'. And everything to do with enforcing orthodox Catholicism in the recently reconquered Iberian peninsula.

And again, its moot. As even your inaccurate scenario proves my point: Religion being interpreted to commit violence by those who want to commit violence.

SPAIN did not invent the INQUISITION. It was a machination of rome----and
the POPE. Isabella was simply a big ENTHUSIAST, Pious lady that she was
she facilitated its increasingly barbaric manifestations -----that's all--------sorta like
in manner of an HYSTERICALLY RELIGIOUS slut.

A devoutly religious woman who interpreted her religion to justify violence.

Again, proving my point perfectly.

You have demonstrated the fact that you are slightly befuddled--South America
was HARD HIT by the SPANISH interpretation of the beauty of the INQUISITION-
but the inquisition itself was OF ROME although ROME itself never did it so GOOD as did Spain

The Spanish Catholic interpretation of the Catholic Inquisition, authorized by the Catholic Church?

You do realize you just proved my point a third time, right?

you made no point at all--------you presented false information. According to
YOUR interpretation----CONSTANTINE was not the emperor of the "HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE" Your jumped centuries. I cannot interpret your map---
it looks like even rome was not part of the holy roman empire

 

[irosie91]

adolf never formerly declared himself "not catholic" nor was he excommunicated. Magda Goebbels was ------kinda pious. I would
agree that Adolf did not really consider himself a catholic-----Pius did not
excommunicate him for POLITICAL REASONS

In the Nazi party religion was secondary, above all loyalty to party was mandatory. The Nazis never aligned themselves with any religion.

not entirely true-------the Nazi party claimed itself to be "Christian" although
it is clear they really preferred THOR

The Nazi party claimed anything to promote the party. They never aligned with any religion. That's just fact

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

The Nazis were huge on slogans. You may as well give up, I've studied WWII and the Nazi party for years. The party was paramount and they used any means necessary to promote the party

very true---------so? I did not suggest that adolf was THE POPE -----or a saint or even "an anointed ruler" but he was certainly not a buddhist

 

[Weatherman2020]

A guy who knows what he's talking about. If you want to make sense of what's going on, watch this video.

Does Islam promote violence? No, Islam is a religion, it's the people who promote violence. Some parts of Islam are violent, he explains that Buddhists in Nepal are going around slaughtering people, does Buddhism promote violence then?

I'd add that there are more Muslims now who are committing acts of violence in response to what the US has been doing, especially over the last 12 years.

Is water wet?

 

[TNHarley]

A guy who knows what he's talking about. If you want to make sense of what's going on, watch this video.

Does Islam promote violence? No, Islam is a religion, it's the people who promote violence. Some parts of Islam are violent, he explains that Buddhists in Nepal are going around slaughtering people, does Buddhism promote violence then?

I'd add that there are more Muslims now who are committing acts of violence in response to what the US has been doing, especially over the last 12 years.

Revisionist bullshit
It has been violent since its inception. It was BUILT on violence.
Muslims have been doing this shit since it started. Especially to themselves.
BTW, concerning Buddhists : "kings of righteousness".

So has Christianity. So what?

Violence is a HUMAN trait. Just because there has been violence among people who are Muslims since their first day, doesn't mean Islam is inherently violent.

Christians invaded Iraq and fucked up the post war period. Did Christians go and condemn this en masse?

You are a goddamn fool if you try and compare any religion to Islam, present day. Christianity "grew up". The barbaric ME'ers haven't.
Islam is violent, period. You are also a goddamn fool if you deny the OBVIOUS. Violence is ALL OVER their "holy" book. Those people that are violent are just following their book. Maybe one day they will start cherry picking like Christianity did.

Look at the Christian President who invaded Iraq.

Iraq was a holy war you fuckin moron?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

In the Nazi party religion was secondary, above all loyalty to party was mandatory. The Nazis never aligned themselves with any religion.

not entirely true-------the Nazi party claimed itself to be "Christian" although
it is clear they really preferred THOR

The Nazi party claimed anything to promote the party. They never aligned with any religion. That's just fact

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

The Nazis were huge on slogans. You may as well give up, I've studied WWII and the Nazi party for years. The party was paramount and they used any means necessary to promote the party

very true---------so? I did not suggest that adolf was THE POPE -----or a saint or even "an anointed ruler" but he was certainly not a buddhist

He was insane....but crazy like a fox

 

[irosie91]

Your enemies are the ones who try to hurt you. All of Islam is not trying to hurt the Christian world, and all of Christianity is not doing the same either.

The outliers are the cause, and to brush them all with the same irosie sauce is stupid.

Jake lies again------at no time did I suggest that ALL MUSLIMS are out to slit throats--------however anyone who imagines that ----institutional islam is actually friendly towards----
Christians, hindus, jews , Buddhists or Klingons-----IN GENERAL in any land has
never interacted with muslims or visited mosques. I wonder what "ALL OF ISLAM"
means

composition fallacy and ad hom attack

At no time did I say anything of the sort, irosie.

Institutional Christianity is does not look on Muslims as it does believers, either.

I am asking context and nuance from you.

you failed again 'INSTITUTIONAL CHRISTIANITY" ??? does not look upon muslims in THE SAME WAY THAT IT LOOKS UPON BELIEVERS ----so?
In the past it put non believers in hell-------and did as muslims ---YELL
"infidel" and swing swords.--------lately it stopped. Islam is still at it

 

[Weatherman2020]

Too funny. As expected all of the Leftards jump out of the woodwork to defend Islamofascism with the "yeah but America is bad too" crap.

What a bunch of ignorant asses.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right, exemplified by sassy etc., and the far left by their wingos fail to demonstrate context and nuance.

 

[irosie91]

not entirely true-------the Nazi party claimed itself to be "Christian" although
it is clear they really preferred THOR

The Nazi party claimed anything to promote the party. They never aligned with any religion. That's just fact

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

The Nazis were huge on slogans. You may as well give up, I've studied WWII and the Nazi party for years. The party was paramount and they used any means necessary to promote the party

very true---------so? I did not suggest that adolf was THE POPE -----or a saint or even "an anointed ruler" but he was certainly not a buddhist

He was insane....but crazy like a fox

the very best of the psychiatrists------(Austrian, german and even French) got together in a "GRAND ROUNDS" exercise to diagnose him "NOT INSANE"---
severe "PERSONALITY DISORDER"

 

[Weatherman2020]

Like the Nazi stooges you fall for anything your Fueher tells you.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The Nazi party claimed anything to promote the party. They never aligned with any religion. That's just fact

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

The Nazis were huge on slogans. You may as well give up, I've studied WWII and the Nazi party for years. The party was paramount and they used any means necessary to promote the party

very true---------so? I did not suggest that adolf was THE POPE -----or a saint or even "an anointed ruler" but he was certainly not a buddhist

He was insane....but crazy like a fox

the very best of the psychiatrists------(Austrian, german and even French) got together in a "GRAND ROUNDS" exercise to diagnose him "NOT INSANE"---
severe "PERSONALITY DISORDER"

I don't know about that, I do know he's better off dead

 

[SassyIrishLass]

View attachment 54975
A typical "Modern Day" Christian. How soon they forget.

You'd be wise to study history, Hitler left the Church and the Nazis considered the party their religion. Party first over all things

Many of the institutional Christian churches operating in Germany supported the Nazi Party and Hitler, lgs.

Well duh, oppose them and you died. Stop bothering me with your elementary BS

 

[irosie91]

does this sound familiar to you? "kinder, kirche und kuche" <<< this is the role
of the GOOD NAZI WOMAN--------children, church and kitchen.
"ALLIGNED"??? they certainly did not reject religion-----no one got thrown
out for attending church

The Nazis were huge on slogans. You may as well give up, I've studied WWII and the Nazi party for years. The party was paramount and they used any means necessary to promote the party

very true---------so? I did not suggest that adolf was THE POPE -----or a saint or even "an anointed ruler" but he was certainly not a buddhist

He was insane....but crazy like a fox

the very best of the psychiatrists------(Austrian, german and even French) got together in a "GRAND ROUNDS" exercise to diagnose him "NOT INSANE"---
severe "PERSONALITY DISORDER"

I don't know about that, I do know he's better off dead

Magda adored him, even while in church ----all dressed up in her white
lace veil thing on her head-----looking like an ANGEL

 

[Skylar]

I agree its a matter of interpertation. If you want to hurt people, you'll find justification for it in your religion. Mother Teresa and Tomas de Torquemada used the same Bible. So we might be looking in the wrong place. Is this a product of Islam? Or a product of Arab culture. Or a product of what's happening n the regions that generate such extremists?

Or a none of the above.

Learn some history------Torquemada was a product of the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE-------Mother Teresa was a product of a very reformed version of the catholic church.

The Holy Roman Empire was largely a German and Austrian creature. By the age of Torquemada's inquisition, it was often called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. The Holy Roman Empire had actually lost many of its Italian holdings in this same era with the Vatican fighting and largely winning practical autonomy from the Empire before the inquisition.

While Spain would eventually come into the orbit of the Holy Roman Empire, it wasn't until Torquemada was long dead (Isabella's grandson was actually Holy Roman Emperor). And Spain never became territorial part of the Empire.

The inquisition was the product of the Spanish response to reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors. It was used to purge the Moorish influence, shore up the authority of the 'Catholic Monarchs' of Isabella and Ferdinand, and to ensure orthodoxy among converted Jews and Muslims. It has next to nothing to do with the 'Holy Roman Empire'.

Not only are you wrong, your entire point is moot. As the same Bible was used to justify both the Spanish Inquisition and the soup kitchens of Mother Terasa. The difference.....was the interpretation and motive. With the religion interpreted to match the agendas and beliefs of the individuals interpreting it.

Which is my entire point.

Islamic violence is-----in accordance with Islamic ideology----no doubt a
kind of syncresis of theological thought BROUGHT to arabia by persons interested in the SILK ROAD and the indigenous population and culture of arabia. That syncretic ideology follows wherever islam "went" Throat slitting of "non-believers" was introduced to south east asia thru Islamic ideology

The natives of Peru, the Caribbean, Mexico and central America weren't met with snuggles and unicorn kisses from Christianity either. With Christian doctrine adapted to justify the actions taken there.

Which again, demonstrates my point.

You are very confused-------you seem to be focusing on the fact that what had been
the HOLY ROMAN empire including the Iberian Penninsula------eventually became
focused MORE on the AUSTRIAN HUNGARIAN EMPIRE-----but actually STILL included---not only the Iberian Peninsula but even the British Isles and France.

No, it didn't. This was the Holy Roman Empire:

It was also called the 'Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation' for a reason. As it was overwhelmingly Germanic and Czech. It didn't include Spain. And I defy you to show us a single credible source that indicates as much.

Worse, you're wrong twice. Those closest that Spain ever came to being part of the Holy Roman empire was under Emperor Charles V.....the grandson of Isabella and Ferdinand. He was king of Spain AND the Holy Roman Emperor. But Spain still wasn't part of the HRE. They simply had the same sovereign during his reign. And Charles V wasn't even born until years after Torquemada was already dead.

Meaning that your time line doesn't work, even by the most wildly accommodating interpretations of the HRE . And your history is off.

Torquemada's actions had virtually nothing to do with the "Holy Roman Empire'. And everything to do with enforcing orthodox Catholicism in the recently reconquered Iberian peninsula.

And again, its moot. As even your inaccurate scenario proves my point: Religion being interpreted to commit violence by those who want to commit violence.

SPAIN did not invent the INQUISITION. It was a machination of rome----and
the POPE. Isabella was simply a big ENTHUSIAST, Pious lady that she was
she facilitated its increasingly barbaric manifestations -----that's all--------sorta like
in manner of an HYSTERICALLY RELIGIOUS slut.

A devoutly religious woman who interpreted her religion to justify violence.

Again, proving my point perfectly.

You have demonstrated the fact that you are slightly befuddled--South America
was HARD HIT by the SPANISH interpretation of the beauty of the INQUISITION-
but the inquisition itself was OF ROME although ROME itself never did it so GOOD as did Spain

The Spanish Catholic interpretation of the Catholic Inquisition, authorized by the Catholic Church?

You do realize you just proved my point a third time, right?

you made no point at all--------you presented false information.

Says you, citing yourself. You've presented nothing but you typing to back anything you've said. You can't even logically establish a connection between the Spanish Inquisition and the Holy Roman Empire. As both Spain and the Vatican were autonomous of the HRE during the inquisition.

And the only plausible argument you can make for the inclusion of Spain into the HRE didn't occur until about half a century AFTER Torquemada was already dead. And even then you'd be wrong. Spain was not part of the HRE.

You'd need a Delorean or a blue police box to make your argument work be even the most generous interpretations of the Holy Roman Empire.

And of course, your entire argument is moot. Is you're arguing what I'm arguing: Religion being intepreted to meet the beliefs and motives of the people interpreting it.

YOUR interpretation----CONSTANTINE was not the emperor of the "HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE" Your jumped centuries. I cannot interpret your map---

Of course he wasn't. The Holy Roman Empire wasn't founded until the 700s. By Charlemagne. Constantine was a Roman emperor....about 400 years earlier. You're literally off by centuries. But hey, both of their names started with a C.

I can't stress this point enough, but you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.